Skip to main content

Full text of "Annual historical review"

See other formats

boc. . 
CtlOX. t/4-- 



FY 94 


University of 

Illinois Library 




Annual Command History 

Fiscal Year 1994 


Prepared By 

Historical Office 
Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command 

November 1996 

Approved for public release and unlimited distribution. 

Billy K. Sfolomon v 
Major General, USA 
Chief of Staff 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 


This Annual Command History (ACH) of the Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command (HQ AMC) 
covers fiscal year 1994, the thirtieth-second year of AMC's service as the Army major command dedicated to 
providing logistics support and sustainment to the soldier. This volume was prepared by HQ AMC's Historical 
Office, based primarily on submissions from staff elements. The ACH, prepared according to Army Regulation 
870-5, is indebted to those in the Command who provided information pertaining to their respective staff 
elements. This volume could not have been completed if not for their reports and the efforts of Historical Office 

The Annual Command History serves as a chronicle for the AMC Headquarters, making the past a means 
of managing the present and projecting the future. This ACH is a record of AMC's past, to be used in the future 
by AMC personnel and others interested in AMC's past. 

The soldiers and civilians of AMC, in the headquarters and in the field, support the soldier through the 
development, acquisition, fielding and sustainment of new weapons, as well as the provision of ammunition to 
all the services. The AMC Logistics Support Element played an active role in five peacekeeping missions in 
FY94: Operations Support/Restore Hope in Somalia from December 1992 until March 1994, Operations 
Support/Provide Hope in Rwanda in July 1994, Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti in September 1994, 
Operation Vigilant Warrior in Kuwait in September 1994, and Operation Able Sentry in Macedonia throughout 
FY94. AMC has shown its ability to support whatever missions came its way. 

The preparation of this history was a team effort. Members of the HQ AMC Historical Office prepared 
this volume under the guidance of the AMC Command Historian. Most of the compilation of this history was 
done by Mr. Jeffrey Hosmer, Historian. All sections of this volume were reviewed by the submitting offices for 
Operations Security and are releasable to the general public. 


Command Historian 


General Jimmy D. Ross 

Commanding General 
toll February 1994 

General Leon E. Salomon 

Commanding General 
from 12 February 1994 


Lieutenant General Leo J. Pigaty 

Deputy Commanding General 
to 14 July 1994 




a ^^ 



\ \ \1 1 

i iu:t 




Lieutenant General John G. Coburn 

Deputy Commanding General 
from 14 July 1994 


Major General Johnnie E. Wilson 

Chief of Staff 
to 28 January 1994 


Major General Ray E. McCoy 

Chief of Staff 
from 28 January 1994 

Mr. Darold L. Griffin 

Principal Deputy for Acquisition 
to 1 April 1994 


Dr. Kenneth J. Oscar 

Principal Deputy for Acquisition 
from 3 April 1994 


Mr. Arthur R. Keltz 

Principal Deputy for Logistics 


Dr. Richard Chait 

Principal Deputy for Technology 
to December 1993 


Mr. Michael Fisette 

Principal Deputy for Technology 
from May 1994 


CSM Michael B. Pierce 

Command Sergeant Major 


Mr. David S. Abdelnour 

ADCS for Engineering, Housing, 
Environment & Installation Logistics 

Mr. Stanley J. Alster 

Special Assistant for Quality 

Mr. James B. Emahiser 

ADCS for Logistics 

ifc§*"\ p 21 

KB- Ri Hk\^l 

MG George E. Friel 

DCS for Chemical and 
Biological Matters 

BG Stuart W. Gerald 

DCS for Acquisition 
from 17 July 1994 

MG Frank F. Henderson 

DCS for Logistics 


I* J 







• * 1 

BG William R. Holmes 

DCS for Ammunition 

COL William K. Huff 

Inspector General 
to June 1994 

Mr. George L. Jones 

DCS for Personnel 

COL Austin J. Kennedy HI 

DCS for Intelligence 
from 24 July 1994 

Mr. Edward J. Korte 

Command Counsel 

Mr. Leonard H. Maguire 

Chief, Internal Review and 
Audit Compliance Office 


COL Stephen R. Maness 

Commander, AMC-Europe 
to 14 July 1994 

COL Thomas McNamara 

DCS for Intelligence 
to 24 July 1994 

COL Tommy T. Osborne 

Commander, Information 

Systems Command-AMC, 

Corporate Information Officer 

MG Thomas L. Prather 

DCS for Research, 
Development, and Engineering 

Mr. John E. Rankin 

Chief, Safety Office 

COL John C. Rickman 

AMC Inspector General 
from July 1994 


' M 




I 1 

Mr. Richard R. Rogowski 

ADCS for Acquisition 

Mr. Michael C. Sandusky 

Chief, Special Analysis Office 

Ms. Marilyn Scarbrough 

Chief, Office of Equal 

BG Roger G. Thompson 

DCS for Resource Management 
from August 1993 

Mr. Gary Tull 

Acting DCS for Acquisition 

Mr. Robert O. Weidenmuller 

ADCS for Resource 


Key Personnel Not Pictured 

Mr. Steve V. Balint 
Mrs. Barbara Binney 
Mr. Richard H. Callan 
Dr. Robert G. Darius 
COL Charles D. Daves 
COL Paul W. Dickinson 
Mr. Robert K. Dubois 
COL Arthur J. Gipson 
Mr. James C. Hill 
COL Donald R. Hite 
COL John E. Kalokerinos 
Mr. Donald Kirchoffher 
COL David H. Longley 
COL Gerald Mangham 
COL Arthur R. Marshall, Jr. 
COL Arley H. McCormick 
Mr. Gregory P. Mcintosh 
COL Mark W. Potter 
Mr. Sidney L. Shoemaker 
CAPT Robert Werling, USN 
COL Howard A. Wiener 

Special Assistant for Quality. 

Associate Director, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Bsiness Utilization. 

Chief, CALS Office. 

Command Historian. 

Corporate Information Officer 

Inspector General. 

Deputy Executive Director for TMDE. 

ADCS for Personnel. 

ADCS for Ammunition. 

Commander, AMC-Far East. 

Senior U.S. Army Reserve Advisor 

Chief, Public Affairs Office. 

Chief, Congressional Liaison Office. 

Command Chaplain 

Chief, Office of International Cooperative Programs. 

Commander, AMC-Europe (From 23 Aug 1994) 

Special Assistant for Joint Activities. 

DCS for Engineering, Housing, Environment, & Installation Logistics. 

Chief, Protocol Office. 

Deputy Executive Director for Conventional Ammo. 

Command Surgeon. 




AMC Change of Command 1 

"At AMC, the Future Begins Today" 1 



Introduction 8 

DOD Process Action Team (PAT) on Military Specifications and Standards 8 

Acquisition Reform 8 

AMC Business Planning 8 

Laboratory Joint Cross Service Group 9 

Modeling and Simulation 9 

Support to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) 9 

Engineer and Scientist (Non-Construction) Career Program 9 

Acquisition Training — Roadshows 10 

Sector Surveys 10 

Non-Developmental Items (NDI) 10 

Activity Based Cost (ABC) 10 

Specifications and Standards 10 


Logistics Power Projection 11 

Army War Reserves (AWR) 11 

Single Stock Fund (SSF) 11 

Total Asset Visibility (TAV)/In-Transit Visibility (ITV) 12 

Consumable Item Transfer (CIT) 12 

Integrated Sustainment Maintenance (ISM) 12 

Training of Logistics Interns 12 

Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force (LAM) 13 

Depot Consolidation Issues 13 


Technology Leveraging 13 

AMC/User Interaction 14 

The Federated Laboratory 14 

Personnel 14 

Change of Command, Chief of Staff, AMC 14 



Organization and Key Personnel 15 

Organizational Changes During FY94 15 

AMC Automated Manpower Management Information System (AAMMIS) 15 

The Cube 16 


U.S. Army Materiel Command DCSRM Command Reshape Effort 16 

Army Ideas for Excellence Program 17 

Program Objective Memorandum (POM) 17 

Unfinanced Requirements (UFR) 17 

OMA Decrement Drill 17 

GEN Ross' Farewell Dinner 17 

Command Budget Estimate (CBE) 18 

Fiscal Year 1994 Year-End Close 18 

War Reserves Program 18 

U.S. Army Materiel Command Logistics Support Activity (LSE) 18 

U.S. Army Strategic Mobility Logistics Base (SMLB) 18 

Inflation Guidance 19 

Economic Analysis (EA) 19 

AMC Capital Budget Program 19 

Economic Analysis Policy for Capital Budget Projects 19 

Operating and Support Cost Reduction Program (OSCR) 20 

Army Cost Review Board (CRB) 20 

Capital Budget 20 

Unit Costing of Ammunition 20 

DBOF Manpower 21 

DBOF Depot Maintenance Other, and Depot Maintenance-Ordnance Business Areas 21 

Supply Management, Army (SMA) 21 

Return of Prior Year OMA Funds for Currency Fluctuation 21 

AMC Accountant Awards Program 22 

FY 94 Year End Accounting Closeout 22 

Closing Appropriations 22 

Unmatched Disbursements (UMDs) 22 

Deployment of Electronic Timekeeping System (ETS) Throughout Headquarters AMC 22 

Budget Issues 23 



Organization and Key Personnel 24 


Facilities 25 

Military Construction, Army Program 25 

Master Planning 27 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 27 

Real Property Master Planning 28 

Mobilization (Contingency) Master Planning 28 

Installation Status Reports 28 

Army Family Housing Funding (AFH) 29 

Army Family Housing Funding Construction 29 

Divestiture of Army Family Housing Dwelling Units 29 

Real Property Management Activities 29 

Unconstrained Requirements Reporting 30 

Lead-Based Paint (LBP) 30 

Facilities Engineering / Energy Program Reviews (FE/EPR) 30 


Special Assistance Visits 30 

Facilities Training Workshop 31 

Standard Design Reviews 31 

Facility Reduction Program (FRP) 31 

Fire Prevention and Protection Program 31 


Organization 32 

Environmental Compliance Program Execution 32 

Environmental Compliance Assessment System (ECAS) 32 

Natural Resources Program Reviews (NRPRs) 33 

Natural Resources Management 34 

Air Quality 34 

Storm Water Management 35 

Chesapeake Bay Program 35 

Radon Reduction Program (RRP) 35 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 35 

Environmental Restoration Program 36 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 37 

Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program 37 

Hazardous Waste Minimization / Pollution Prevention 37 

Army Compliance Tracking System (ACTS) 38 

Environmental Compliance Program Execution 39 

Army Environmental Requirements Report 39 


Acquisition of Privately Owned Property for Environmental Remediation Purposes 39 

Interim Leasing, Sacramento Army Depot (SAAD) 40 

Distribution of Proceeds Generated by AMC Installations 40 

Real Property Inventory (RPI) 40 

Real Property Inventory Reduction 41 


Command Supply Management Review (CSMR) 41 

Food Service Program Management Reviews (FSPMRs) 41 

Command Equipment Management Program Review (CEMPR) 41 

Administrative Transport Management Survey (ATMS) 42 

Equipment Survey Program (ESP) 42 

Technical Assistance Visits 43 

Excess Property Management 43 

Supply and Maintenance Excellence Awards 44 

Philip A. Connelly Award Program for Excellence in Army Food Service 45 

Single Stock Fund (SSF) 45 

Automated Systems Management 46 

Workshops and Conferences 47 

Equipment Management 47 

Other Workshops 48 


Special Access Program (SAP) Oversight 49 

Foreign Disclosure Statistics 49 


Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty 50 

Chemical Initiative 50 

OPEN SKIES Treaty 50 

Operations Security (OPSEC) Management 50 

Current Intelligence / Headquarters Support 51 

Special Security Office (SSO) / DCSINT 51 

Support to Contingencies 51 

Statements of Intelligence Interest (SII) 52 

U.S. Army Technical Detachment (ATD) Intelligence Account Established 52 

Product Evaluations 52 

Requirements for Threat Support 52 

Production Requirements (PRs) 53 

Army Intelligence Priorities Process 53 

Time Sensitive Requirements 53 

Technology Security 54 

Modeling and Simulation (M&S) 54 

Foreign Materiel Acquisition and Exploitation 54 

D650 Program 55 

AMC Intelligence Automation Effort 55 

Threat Support Documentation 55 

Acquisition Systems Protection Planning (ASPP) 56 


Organization and Manpower 57 


FY94 Reshape Planning and Execution 57 

AMC Centralized Intern Program 58 


Organization and Mission 58 

Strength Management Division 58 

Personnel Service Center 59 

Command Retention Office 59 

Military and Civilian Awards Office 59 

Command Strength 59 

Force Reduction Management Programs 59 

Operational Support for Contingency Operations 59 

Personnel Assistance Visits 60 

Retention Objectives 60 

Assistant Secretary of the Army (M&RA) Visit 60 

Chain Teaching Program 60 

Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) 60 

General Staff with Troops Positions 60 

Awards Statistical Data 60 

Army Family and Community Programs and Services 61 

Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR) 61 


Mission, Manpower and Organization 66 


Key Personnel 66 

DISA/DISO Naming Conventions and Standards for Fee-for-Service 66 

Service Level Agreements (SLA) 67 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 68 

AMC Library Program Office 68 

AMC Libraries 68 

AMC Library BRAC Installations 68 

Library Staffing 69 

AMC Librarian Interns 69 

Library E-Mail Access 69 

Library Accountability 69 

Library Networking Tools 69 

Library Professional Recognition 69 

HQDA Administrative Publications Functional Process Improvement 70 

Departmental Printing Budget 70 

Career Program 34 Management - Information Mission Area (IMA) 71 

Zip+4 Mail Code Program Implementation 71 

Functional Process Improvement (FPI) for Records Management 71 

Digitizing AMC 71 

Electronic Record Keeping Workshop 72 

AMC Policy Review - Reduction of AMC Publications, Forms, and Reporting Requirements ... 72 

CD-ROM Initiatives 73 

Equipment Reutilization Program 73 

Single Stock Fund Systems Integration Test 73 

AMC Telecommunications 73 

Sustaining Base Information Services (SBIS) Contract 74 

Enterprise Information Systems (EIS) 74 

Global Command and Control System (GCCS) 75 

War Reserves Automation 75 

Information Management Process Action Committee (IMP AC) 75 

AMC Mid-Tier Business Information Processing Study (AMBIPS) 76 

Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP) 76 

Integrated Computer Aided Definition Language (IDEF) 77 

Cost of Defense Megacenter (DMC) Mainframe Processing Services 77 

Requirement Statement (RS) 77 


Organization and Manpower 78 

Participation in the AMC Special Events 78 

AMC Reserve Component (RC) Training Support 78 

AMC General Officer Reserve Components Policy Council (GORCPC) 79 

Reserve Component (RC) Transportation Support (Exercise GOLDEN CARGO 94) 79 


REEF-EX 94 Economical Cost Analysis (Estimates) 80 

REEF-EX 95 (Florida) 81 

Pine Bluff Arsenal (PBA) Reserve Component Training Mission 81 

High Tech Regional Training Site - Maintenance (HTRTS- M), Tobyhanna Army Depot 82 



Organization and Key Personnel 83 

Managing Ecclesiastical Logistics for the Army 83 

Logistics Advisory Group, Armed Forces Chaplain's Board 84 

Inspector General's System Inspection of Quality of Life and Report Sites 84 

Stress Busters 84 


Organization and Key Personnel 85 

Rwanda Relief Effort 85 

AMC Pamphlet 715-3, Volume 4 85 

AMC Command Legal Program - 1994 - 1995 85 

The 1994 - 1995 Strategic Plan for the AMC Legal Organization 86 



Organization and Key Personnel 87 

Physical Reorganization 87 

Joint Technical Coordinating Groups-Integrated Product Data Environment 87 

Electronic Commerce / Electronic Data Interchange (EC / EDI) 87 

Contract Data Requirements List 88 

Digitizing AMC 88 

Joint Computer- Aided Acquisition and Logistics Support (JCALS) 88 


Mission 89 

Organization and Personnel 89 

Formal Inquiries 89 

FY94 Congressional Hearing Cycle 89 

Congressional Affairs Contact Officers (CACO) Training 90 

Congressional Visits 90 

Savings Bonds Campaign 90 


Organization and Key Personnel 91 

Equal Employment Opportunity Workshops 91 

EEO Training Program / Meeting 91 

Complaint Processing 92 

Affirmative Employment Program 92 

U.S. Army Materiel Command 92 

HQ Army Materiel Command (HQ AMC) 93 


Organization and Manpower 94 

Assistance 95 

Inspections 95 

Organizational Inspection Program (OIP) 96 

Acting Inspector General (AIG) Course 97 



Organization and Mission 98 

Personnel 98 

Command Management Issues 98 

Internal Reviews 98 

Significant External Audit Reports 100 

Audit Alert Network 100 

Semiannual Followup Status Reports FY94 100 

Internal Management Control Program 1 00 

Training Requirements 101 


Organization and Mission 1 02 

Manpower 102 

AMC FY93 Annual Safety Report 102 

AMC Designated Safety and Occupational Health Official 102 

Accident Reduction Experience - FY94 1 02 

AMC Supplement 1 TO AR 385-10 103 

AMC Safety Conference 103 

System Safety Policy Action Committee (SYSPAC) 103 

System Safety Risk Assessment for M329A2 Cartridge 103 

AMC Supplement 1 to AR 385-69 104 

Accident Free Year for Explosives Safety 1 04 

AMMOPAC Safety Program Assistance Reviews (SPARs) 104 

Status of AMC-R 385-100, Safety Manual 104 

AMMOPAC Ad Hoc Working Group - Hazard Analysis 104 

AMMOPAC Tasker from Army Fuze Safety Review Board (AFSRB) 104 

Aviation Accident Experience 105 

Accident Free Flight Awards 105 

AMC Aviation Safety and Standardization Symposium 105 

Aviation Safety Surveys 105 

Suspended Cable at White Sands Missile Range 106 

Health Physics Career Program 106 

Update on Depleted Uranium (DU) Vehicle Recovery Plan 1 06 

Radiological Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Issues 106 

Health Physicists Transferred from Fort Belvoir 107 

Chemical Agent Safety and Health Policy Action Committee (CASHPAC) 107 

Commercial Protective Clothing for Chemical Agent Operations 1 07 

Safety Inspection of Russian Technical Inspection Equipment 108 

Electronic Communication for Chemical Safety Offices 108 


Mission and Organization 109 

Occupational Health 1 09 

AEHA Services 110 

Occupational Medicine Ill 

Industrial Hygiene 112 


Health Hazard Assessment Program 112 

Medical Physics 117 

AR 40-14 and DA PAM 40-XX 119 

Environmental Health 120 



Organization and Key Personnel 121 


Acquisition Improvement Field Visits (Roadshows) 122 

Best Value Contracting 123 


Integrated Procurement Systems Office 124 


Weapons Systems Acquisition Cycle Improvement 125 

Acquisition Improvement Initiatives Prioritization 125 

Design to Cost (DTC) 126 

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) 127 

Automation of the Statement of Work (SOW) 129 

Popular Names of Major Items of Equipment 130 

Nondevelopmental Item (NDI) Advocacy 130 

Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT) 131 

Status of DA Pamphlet 70-3, Army Acquisition Procedures 131 

AMC Focal Point for Matrix Support 132 


Waiver to the Secondary Arab Boycott of Israel 132 

Activity Based Costing (ABC) 132 


Technical Industrial Liaison Office (TILO) 133 

Contracted Advisory & Assistance Services (CAAS)/Contracted Consulting Services (CCS). . . 134 


Organization, Mission and Manpower 134 

Key Personnel 135 

Procurement Management Reviews (PMRs) 135 

Joint Logistics Commanders' Acquisition Initiatives Working Group 1 36 

HQ AMC Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) 136 

USASAC Support 137 

Secure Environment Contracting (SEC) 137 

Business Clearance Reviews (BCRs) 1 37 

Overhead Strategy Program Committee 138 

1 1 50 Career Management 138 

Coordination with DLA/DCMC 139 

DLA/DCAA Support 139 


Organization and Key Personnel 1 40 

Ammunition Functional Area Assessment (FAA) 1 40 



Integration Office - General 141 

Research and Development Descriptive Summaries 141 

ASA(RDA)/ASA(FM) Execution Review 141 


Ammunition Logistics Division - Missions and Organization 141 

Conventional Ammunition Demilitarization 141 

Demilitarization Research and Development 1 42 

Ammunition Maintenance 1 42 

Fiscal Year 1 994 Ammunition Operations and Maintenance Army (OMA) Funding 1 43 

European Retrograde (RETROEUR) 143 

Prepositioned Ships 1 44 

War Reserves 1 44 

Explosives Safety Test Management Program 1 44 

Ammunition Surveillance 1 44 

Transportation 1 45 

Ammunition Environmental Issues 1 45 

Integrated Stockpile Management Plan 1 46 


Conventional Ammunition Working Capital Fund (CAWCF) 146 


Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support (ARMS) Initiative 146 

M831A1 Target Practice Cartridge 147 

Hydra 70 Rockets 147 

Production Base 1 47 

Ammunition Production Facilities Consolidation 147 

Permission to Use Non-DOD Hazardous/Toxic Materials at Government Owned Facilities .... 1 47 

25MM M919 APFSDS-T Cartridge 148 

Depleted Uranium (DU) Requirements 1 48 

PM Fuze Transition to Army Fuze Management Agency 1 48 

Transition of Artillery Projectile Development Management from ARDEC to PEO FAS 1 48 

Land Mine Export Moratorium 1 48 


Organization and Key Personnel 150 


Maintenance and Repair/Backlog of Maintenance and Repair (BMAR) 152 

RDTE Base Operations (BASEOPS) 152 

Research Development Test and Evaluation Program Execution Review 152 

FY94 RDTE Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Bill for Financial Support 153 

FY96 RDTE Program Objective Memorandum (POM) to Budget Issues 153 


Procurement Appropriation (Less Ammo) 153 


AMC MSC Pre-Army Systems Acquisition Review Council (ASARC)/ASARC Support 154 

Delegation of MDA for ACAT HI and IV Programs Policy Guidance 154 

Modifications 155 

Special Operations Forces 155 


Quarterly Management Report (QMR) on AMC Managed Systems 155 

Counter Drug Technical Liaison Support 156 

Operating and Support Cost Reduction (OSCR) Program 156 

Industry Visits to Army Units Program 156 


All-Terrain Lifter, Articulated System (ATLAS) 156 

Construction Equipment Investment Meeting 157 

Investigation of the Army's AN/PSS-12 Handheld Metallic Mine Detector 157 

M9 Armored Combat Earthmover (ACE) 157 

Restructuring of the Army's Non-Assault Bridging Program 157 

Restructuring of the Army's Physical Security Equipment Program 158 

Support to the U.S. Army Engineer School 158 

Advanced Aviation Forward Area Refueling System 158 

Army Watercraft Master Plan 159 

Army Water Supply Program 159 

Causeway Systems Programs 160 

Lightweight Arctic Forward Area Refueling Equipment 160 

Modular Base Petroleum Lab 161 

Petroleum Quality Analysis System 161 

Standard Army Refueling System 161 

Palletized Loading System 162 

Reorganization of PM Soldier 162 

Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) 162 

Biological Integrated Detection System 163 

Chemical Protective Mask, M40/M42 163 

XM56 Smoke Generator System 163 

M93 Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance System 163 

Close Combat Tactical Trainer 164 

Fire Support Combined Arms Tactical Trainer (FSCATT) 164 

Tactical Quiet Generator Program 164 



Integrated Product and Process Management (IPPM) Working Group 165 

IPPM Guidebook 165 

Concurrent Engineering (CE) Symposium — ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal 165 

Restoration of AMC's World War II Memorial Tree 1 66 

Commercialization of MIL-STD-499, Systems Engineering 166 

Joint Services Revise Engineering Support Regulations to DLA 1 66 

Comanche Contract Scrub 1 66 

Director General for Quality Assurance (DGQA) 166 

Functional Support Template (FST) Guidebook 1 67 

Performance Specification Guidebook 1 67 

Roadshow III (RSIII) 167 

Roadshow IV 167 

Joint Logistic Commands (JLC) JPCG-CRM Forum '94 167 

Functional Working Groups (FWGs) 1 68 

MIL-STD-498, Software Design and Documentation 1 68 

NATO Portable Common Interface Set (PCIS) 168 


NATO Special Working Group on ADA Programming Support Environments 168 

Concurrent Engineering Computer Aided Design (CE CAD) 168 

Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) 1 69 


Value Engineering (VE) 169 

Atlanta Conference 1994 169 

TRADOC/Republic of Korea Staff Talks October 1993 170 

Materiel Release Process 171 

Automated Document Conversion System (ADCS) 171 

CLIP & CMIS 171 

DA Pam 70-XX Part 9 Section A-Configuration Management 172 

Depot Access to TD/CMS Data 172 

Joint Logistics Systems Center (JLSC) Business Process Model (BPM) 172 

Multi-User Engineering Change Proposal Automated Review System (MEARS) 172 

Engineering Data Management Systems (EDMS) Program Management Office (PMO) 172 

EDMICS Migration Test Facility 173 

Functional Economic Analysis (FEA) of U.S. Army Depots to Receive JEDM 173 


JCALS Joint Function Requirement Determination Teams (JFRDTs) 173 

Army Specifications and Standards Action Team (ASS AT) 173 

Final Update to DA Pam 70-XX for Army Standardization Program (Part 6Q) 174 

Memorandum on the Use of Commercial Specifications and Standards 174 

Class I Ozone Depleting Chemicals (ODCs) 174 

First Standardization Improvement Council (SIC) Meeting, 20 July 1994 174 

Industry-Government Standards Partnership V Conference 174 

Memorandum Directing Army Implementation of the Report "Blueprint for Change" 174 

Plan of Action for Army Acquisition Community Compliance with Executive Order 12856 175 

Process Action Team on Military Specifications and Standards 175 

World Standards Day Reception-Cannon Caucus Room 175 

Data Management 175 

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) 175 

Acquisition Reform Initiatives Accounting Study 175 

Department of the Army (DA) Test and Evaluation (T&E) Managers April - October 1994 176 


Non-Developmental Item (NDI) Program 176 

Technology Implementation and Infrastructure Improvement (TI 3 ) Initiative 1 77 

Industrial Sector Surveys 178 

Joint Flexible Computer Integrated Manufacturing (FCIM) Program 178 

Manufacturing Science & Technology Program (MS&T) 179 


Association of the United States Army (AUS A) Symposiums 1 80 

Acquisition Streamlining 181 

Exercise Atlantic Resolve 181 

Exercise Northern Lights 1 82 

Exercise Prairie Warrior 183 

Exercise Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration (RSOI) 183 

Exercise Ulchi Focus Lens 183 

FY94 Data Collection 184 


Logistics Anchor Desk 184 

Total Asset Visibility 184 


BRAC 95 Joint Laboratories Cross-Service Group (JLCSG) 185 

AMC Laboratory Construction 185 

Former Soviet Union (FSU) Activities 185 

International RDTE 185 

RDTE Space Authorization Panel 186 

AMC RDTE Board of Directors (BOD) 186 

AMC Support for Army Science and Technology Master Plan (ASTMP) 186 

AMC Support to the Army RD&A Bulletin 186 

AMC Support to the Army Science Board Call for Study Topics 187 

U.S. Army Materiel Command S&T Accomplishments Brochure 187 

LRRDAP Standard Automated System (LSAS) UpgTade 187 

Science and Technology Objective Review 187 

Technology Demonstration and Warfighting Experiments 188 

Battlefield Digitization 188 


Environmental Best Manufacturing Practices (EBMP) Program 189 

Joint Group on Acquisition Pollution Prevention 189 

North American Technology and Industrial Base Organization (NATIBO) 190 

Pollution Prevention in the Acquisition Process - Outreach Program 190 

Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements 191 

Pollution Prevention in the Manufacturing Process 191 

Toxicological Support to the Armored System Modernization Program 192 

Utilization of Non-Military Specifications and Standards 193 

Process Action Team (PAT) on Military Specifications and Standards 194 

Pollution Prevention in the Acquisition Process — Program Support to the Materiel Developer . . 194 
Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Elimination of Ozone-Depleting Chemicals (ODCs) . . 195 


Budd Light and the Combat Identification Panel (CIP) 196 


Organization and Key Personnel 197 

FY94 Interpreters' Key Activities 197 

American, British, Canadian and Australian (ABC A) Armies Program 198 

Defense Data Exchange Program (DDEP) 198 

Scientist and Engineer Exchange Program (SEEP) 199 

Command Group Trips Overseas 199 

"International Day" at the U.S. Army Battle Labs 199 

Far East 200 

AMC Loan Program 200 

AMC Emergency Operations 200 

Germany 200 

France 201 

Significant U.SVFrance Cooperative Activities 1994 201 

Sweden 204 

International Cooperative R&D Agreements 204 


International Acquisition Education Advisory Group Meeting Participation and Support 205 



Organization and Key Personnel 207 

Accountability and Management of Army War Reserves (AWR) 207 

ODCSLOG Aviation Readiness Initiatives 208 

AMC Unit Status Reporting (USR) 209 

SORTS Monthly Briefing to the Chief of Staff, Army (CSA) 209 

Joint Group on Logistics Readiness (JG-LR) 210 

Functional Area Analysis (FAA) 210 

AMC Aviation Office 211 

Preparation of Sustainment Requirements for Various OPLANs and Contingencies 211 

Operations 212 

Total Package Fielding (TPF) 214 

Defense Depot Maintenance Council (DDMC) Business Plan (BP) 214 

Depot Maintenance 215 

Depot Maintenance Program Review 216 

Core Depot Maintenance 216 

Project STIR (Special Technical Inspection and Repair) 216 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 95 Input 216 

Depot Maintenance Competition 217 

Depot Maintenance Resource Predictive Model 217 

Depot Maintenance - 60/40 Organic/Contract Report 217 

Policy on Manufacturing by Army Facilities 218 

Enhanced Specialized Repair Activity (SRA) Request Procedures 218 

Joint Group on Logistics Readiness (JG-LR) Depot Maintenance Backlog Assessment 218 

New Equipment Training (NET) 218 

M48/M60 Tank Demilitarization 218 

Depot Profile Initiative 219 

Intelligence Electronic Warfare Sustainment Streamlining Study (IEWSS) 219 

Tactical Missile Consolidation 220 

Consolidate Pensacola NADEP H-60/AH-1 W Work Load to CCAD 220 

AMC (DCSLOG) Biweekly Video Teleconference (VTC) 220 

End Item Supply Depot Support 221 

End Item Second Destination Transportation 221 

End Item Inventory Control Point Operations 222 

Total Maintenance End Item Integrated Materiel Management 222 

Application of DMRD 902, Supply Depot Operations 222 

Disposal of Flight Safety Critical Aircraft Parts 223 

Automatic Identification Technology (AIT) 223 

Ozone Depleting Chemicals (ODC)/HALON 1301 Replacement 224 

Demilitarization (DEMIL) and Security Control Program 225 

Secondary and Major Item Destination Transportation (SDT) Policy 225 

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) 226 

FY94 DBOF Supply Management Army (SMA) Capital Budget Program 226 

AMC Installation Division (AMC-ID) Retail Supply Management Army 226 


USAREUR Retrograde (RETROEUR) 227 

Wholesale Supply Management Army (SMA) Program 227 

Total Army Inventory Management (TAIM) Program 227 

Consumable Item Transfer (CIT) 228 

AMC Secondary Item Mobilization Account 229 

Unique Item Tracking (UIT) 229 

Total Asset Visibility (TAV) 230 

Single Stock Fund (SSF) 230 

Public-Public Competition 231 


Mission and Organization 232 

Key Personnel 232 

Update of the Conventional Ammunition Working Capital Fund (CAWCF 232 

Update of the Integrated Conventional Ammunition Procurement Plan (ICAPP) 233 

Update of DOD Directive 5160.65, Subject: SMCA; and the SMCA Charter 233 

Military Construction of Ammunition Facilities 233 


Mission, Organization, and Personnel 234 

FY94 Small Business Program 234 

AMC Pamphlet AMC-P-715-14, "How to Do Business With AMC" 234 

FY94 SADBU Award for Significant Contributions in Small Business 234 

GENESIS Project 234 


Joint Logistics Commanders' Meetings 235 


Overview 236 

Key Personnel 237 

Key Personnel Changes 238 

Status of Program Manager, Future Europe (PMFE) 239 

Status of RETROEUR 239 

Status of AR-3 (Prepo Afloat) 240 

Status of AR-2 240 


USAREUR Direct Support System (DSS) Air Line of Communication (ALOC) Program 240 

European Redistribution Facility (ERF) 240 

Status of Redistribution Efforts for FY94 241 

German Federal Labor Court Ruling 241 

New Mission 241 

Status of Modification Work Order (MWO) Program 242 

Materiel Fielding in Europe 242 

Fielding Status Review (FSR) 242 

Central Staging in Europe 243 


Hammonds Barracks 243 


FY94 Manpower Data 243 

Conventional Forces Europe (CFE) 244 

Status of Interservice Support Agreements 244 


Network Upgrade - Hammonds Barracks 244 

Network Upgrade, DOIM 245 

Computer Software Conversion, DOIM 245 

Reutilization and Disposal of ADP Hardware and Software 245 

Computer Maintenance Support 246 

Procurement of Digital Pagers 246 

Compact Disc-Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) Services 246 

Mail Room Expansion at Hammonds Barracks 247 


Support to Macedonia 247 

LAO-E Planning for Contingency Operations 247 

LAO-E Support to Humanitarian Relief effort in Rwanda 248 

LAO-E LAPCAP Program 248 


Realignment Support to USAREUR 248 

Preparations for Deployment 249 

INDEX 251 





Command Management AMCCG 


AMC Change of Command 

On 1 1 February 1994, GEN Leon E. Salomon took command of the U.S. Army Materiel Command from 
departing Commanding General GEN Jimmy D. Ross. In the October 1994 ARMY, a periodical put out by the 
Association of the United States Army (AUS A) , GEN Salomon wrote down what he felt was important for AMC 
to concentrate on in the years ahead'. That article, reprinted below, will serve as the first part of the Command 
Management Chapter. 

"At AMC, the Future Begins Today" 

Rescue Mission, 2010 

The mission is to evacuate U.S. citizens from a foreign country where civil war threatens their safety. U.S. 
soldiers are being air-lifted under the cover of darkness to their designated landing zone in a transport 

Attack helicopters with advanced electronics and firepower fly escort for the mission. The windows of 
the helicopters have built-in, low-level night vision capability that allows pilots and passengers to see in the 
dark without goggles. 

Computers equipped with large flat panel screens allow pilots to scan the landscape directly below and 
over the horizon. Ultrawideband radar penetrates foliage and softer camouflage to detect people and vehicles 
on the ground below. Squad leaders scan computer flat panel screens to assess intelligence and weather 
information coming from satellites and air and ground sensors. 

As the helicopter approaches the landing zone, soldiers adjust their long-range hearing devices to listen 
for sounds of hostile forces. Microclimatic cooling units moderate the oppressive heat of the desert. 

Helmets with the latest target acquisition displays are activated as well as the computer systems that 
integrate global positioning capabilities with intelligence data being sent from overhead satellites. New rifles 
with computerized target detection are loaded with the latest gas-powered munitions and activated for 

The logistical supply line from prepositioned stocks from ships just off the nearest shoreline and C-17 
transports has provided ready access to self-propelled howitzers and advanced armored vehicles with high- 
speed dash capabilities. 

'Leon E. Salomon, "At AMC, the Future Begins Today," ARMY, (Oct 94), Vol. 44, no. 10, pp 69-75. 


Command Management AMCCG 

Other prepo afloat ships are being moved to the theater to further augment equipment and supplies if 
needed. The rapid mobility of equipment and supplies adds additional firepower to the rescue team or combat 
forces of the future. 

This hypothetical rescue mission in 2010 is only one of many contingencies for which the Army must be 
prepared. Similar situations could be imagined for rescue or peacekeeping missions in Bosnia, a 
confrontation in Korea, war in the Middle East or terrorist threats against large population centers in the 
world that would rival the damage done by the bomb at New York City's World Trade Center. 

Army Materiel Command (AMC) has a vital role to play in planning for these hypothetical missions facing 
the Army. AMC will play a key role in equipping and sustaining the Army with superior technology and logistics 
power projection to ensure decisive victory. Equipped, trained, and ready, the Army can project a strategic force, 
capable of decisive victory — into the 21st century. 

To equip, sustain, and project the Army's forces with adequate logistical support, AMC has created a 
powerful synergy — a combination and integration of AMC's core competencies — acquisition excellence, 
technology generation, and logistics power projection. 

AMC scientists and engineers at the Army Research Office (ARO), the Army Research Laboratory (ARL), 
Research Development and Engineering Centers (RDECs), and test centers are committed to the goal of 
generating technology and applying that technology to the battlefield so that our soldiers will have weapons 
systems and a support structure that will be second to none. But innovation and new technology are of no value 
unless they can be converted into systems that are affordable, workable, and available in time to make a difference 
to our soldiers. To that end, AMC is hard at work with the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, 
Development, and Acquisition streamlining and reengineering the Acquisition process to make it faster, cheaper, 
smarter, and better. 

New technology and newly-acquired systems depend on logistics and the ability to deliver and resupply new 
weapons. Logistics power projection is a critical element in the success of our soldiers on the battlefield. 

In the future, war reserves and supplies must be more mobile to meet a threat anyplace in the world. AMC 
logisticians are developing new ways to preposition, transport, and project force on shorter notice anywhere in 
the world. 

The hypothetical rescue mission described flat panel computer screens, ultrawideband radar, night-vision 
windows that allow pilots and passengers to own the night without cumbersome night-vision goggles, and 
technology to collect extensive data on weather, which will give troops an advantage over adversaries. Futuristic 
as those ideas may sound today, they are major technologies now under development at ARO, ARL, and AMC 

■ Ultrawideband radar. AMC scientists and engineers are working on a new generation of radar that will 
allow the user to "see through" foliage and softer camouflage material and detect targets that are invisible to 
existing radars. 

Command Management AMCCG 

■ Flat panel displays. The Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) has designated ARL as the 
Defense Department's agent for flat panel screen development and production. The objective is to provide some 
seed money to U.S. companies so that they can get and keep U.S. companies on the cutting edge of flat panel 
technology and production capability. 

■ High-performance computing. ARO and ARL have the lead within DOD for a billion-dollar program 
to develop the next generation of multiple parallel computing machines that will allow the Army to upgrade 
simulation of training devices and allow scientists to conduct complex simulation of fluid dynamics. 

■ Dual-use technology: development and application. ARL is the leader in DOD for the number of 
cooperative research and development agreements that provide a mechanism for transferring technology to and 
from private industry to DOD. AMC plays a vital role in building bridges between government and private 
industry to eliminate duplication of effort in developing and applying new technology. 

■ Simulation technology. AMC is a leader in simulation technology with virtual reality, embedded training 
devices, and protocol standards that allow different types of simulators to talk with each other. Individual weapon 
system simulators have been linked so that unit leaders can simulate battles with tank battalions, aviation, and 
artillery support. 

This ability to simulate the battlefield will completely revolutionize the way soldiers and leaders are trained 
in the future. Simulation with computers will save time, money, and the environment. 

■ Technology insertion. As funding for new-generation weapon systems declines, the focus will be on 
upgrades to existing systems. Previous upgrades to the Ml Abrams tank and the AH-64 Apache helicopter have 
greatly increased the measurable effectiveness of existing systems at a fraction of the cost of introducing 
completely new systems. 

For example, more than 210 upgrades to the Ml Abrams have been planned, ranging from better electronics 
and fire control to advanced armor materials. 

As those upgrades are applied, the Army will have a larger, more modern force of tanks than was used against 
Iraq in Operation Desert Storm. 

Upgrades of the Apache helicopter have greatly improved its effectiveness in the last two years. The 
backbone of the attack helicopter fleet~the AH-64C and AH-64D Apaches-are shown in Army studies to be 7.5 
and 16 times more effective, respectively, than the AH-64s that were used in the Gulf War. Because of this vastly 
increased capability for minimal cost, technology insertion will be the byword for Army laboratories in the 1990s. 

■ Digitizing the battlefield. Future wars are expected to be fought using electronic systems in which the 
rapid flow, processing, and display of information on the battlefield will be as important as hardware and 
munitions. By moving data on the battlefield information superhighway, we will be able to provide a common 
picture of enemy and friendly forces on or near the combat area. 


magery and data from air and ground sensors will be transmitted in digital form to other weapon systems, 
other units, and higher headquarters. Commanders on the digitized battlefield will be able to collect and 

Command Management AMCCG 

process more information than ever before to increase the tempo of combat operations and extend the range of 

Digitizing the battlefield is the key to winning the information war. As was the case in Desert Storm, victory 
will be determined in many cases by which side has the best electronics and knows how to use them to get inside 
the opponent's decision cycle. 

■ Soldier as a system. In addition to looking for ways to improve major weapons systems, AMC labs are 
looking for good things to do for the soldier improve soldier lethality, quality of life in the field, laser eye 
protection, computers, global positioning instruments, long-range hearing devices, laser aiming lights, thermal 
sights, and helmet-mounted visual displays. 

The research and development community at AMC has long been a world-class R&D program, and plans 
are under way to build on that tradition. Construction of a new materials laboratory at Aberdeen Proving 
Ground, Md., and a new physical sciences laboratory at Adelphi Md., will give ARL world-class facilities 
to generate the latest technology for our soldiers. 

AMC is also promoting a federated lab concept that will identify centers of expertise at private sector, 
university, and government-owned labs. Building on the strengths of other labs will eliminate duplication and 
accelerate development of new ideas for defense-related technologies. 

AMC has been working with the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development, and 
Acquisition on a number of initiatives to simplify and expedite the acquisition process: warfighting, rapid 
acquisition program (WRAP), eliminating military specifications and standards (MILSPECS) where commercial 
specifications already exist, forming a partnership with industry on acquisition and alternative dispute resolution. 

■ WRAP. The traditional acquisition process involves the development of a requirements document that 
can take upwards of two years, and two more years in the long-range research, development, and acquisition 
program (LRRDAP) funding process. 

WRAP will cut down on the time involved by going to a letter requirement document that gets development 
work started almost immediately with funding from a developmental fund until more formal LRRDAP funding 
and demonstration prototypes are available. 

■ MILSPECS. To encourage the use of commercially available hardware, specifications, and standards, 
Army buyers must get a waiver before they can impose unique military specifications and standards for 
acquisition. This will eliminate cumbersome MILSPECS that have hindered acquisition of hardware that is 
commercially available off the shelf. 

■ Partnering with industry. AMC is working with industry in presolicitation conferences to explore ideas 
on how to reduce constraints on the acquisition process, build a stronger industrial base, use the best commercial 
practices, and minimize future operating and support costs. This partnering shows promise of paying dividends 
to both government and commercial sectors. 

■ Alternative dispute resolution. To avoid costly litigation, AMC has been exploring ways of resolving 
disputes in the acquisition process that can save time and money for both government and contractors. 

Command Management AMCCG 

AMC and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development, and Acquisition have made some 
rather impressive progress in streamlining each phase of the acquisition process to reduce the time required for 
an acquisition. Progress has also been made in reengineering the acquisition process to combine phases of the 

This streamlining of phases and reengineering to combine phases has realized some big savings of both time 
and money. 

Savings from streamlining the development of the new training helicopter will total an estimated $30 million 
a year or about $600 million over the 20-year life of the system. The streamlining will have saved nearly four 
years when compared with the normal developmental program. 


y using the latest computerized techniques, AMC will be able to offer considerable savings in the testing 
of new weapons systems. For example, with the firing impulse simulator, AMC was able to test the new 
trunnion for the Ml A2 at a cost of only $525,000 versus an estimated $32 million for actual, live firing. 

Non-line-of-sight weapons were tested with distributed interactive simulation techniques and virtual 
simulation, reducing costs from $15.5 million to $2 million and saving nearly ten months in the process (three 
months instead of 13 months). 

Virtual testing of high-mobility, multipurpose wheeled vehicle ball joint failure resulted in a savings of 
$300,000 and six months time. 

AMC is working with industry to explain what we are doing and get their help with acquisition. AMC has 
made considerable progress toward educating its own workforce, as well as industry personnel and academicians, 
with acquisition road shows at industry and AMC locations. Some 8,500 government and industry personnel 
have attended the AMC road shows during the last two years. 

AMC plays a big role in Army logistics and its ability to project the force and support that force anywhere 
in the world. AMC has been working hard together with the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics to develop new 
ways for managing assets, maintaining Army assets at depots in the continental United States, and managing the 
Army's war reserves. 

AMC is testing and evaluating a number of initiatives that will aid in managing assets and promoting 
readiness: total asset visibility (TAV), intransit visibility, integrated sustainment maintenance (ISM), single stock 
fund (SSF) concept, and objective supply capability. 

TAV will provide worldwide access to asset information now contained in many different asset management 
automated systems. TAV will allow managers at al levels to see what the Army owns, uses, and stores for all 
items of supply, regardless of location or ownership. 

Before a request for materiel reaches the national level manager, the retail supply systems will use TAV to 
screen for retail excess materiel that might be cross-leveled in lieu of buying or repairing. By the end of 1995, 
TAV will include a million line items for more than 1 ,000 weapon systems and more 8,000 users. 

Command Management AMCCG 

The single stock fund concept eliminates the retail-level stock fund and the complexities of having retail and 
wholesale stock funds to supply soldiers in the field. 

Integrated sustainment maintenance will integrate depot-level and general support-level maintenance 
management to eliminate redundancy and centralize management. Proof-of-principle studies for ISM are 
nearly completed, and U.S. Army Forces Command is looking at ways to incorporate ISM into their 

During the last year, we have been successful in identifying those core maintenance activities that should be 
done by government-owned and operated depots. Centers of excellence have been identified where the core 
workload will be focused in the future. Furthermore, we have completed plans for centralizing all DOD tactical 
missile workload at Letterkenny Army Depot, Pa., to comply with recommendations of the Defense Depot 
Maintenance Council. 

This fall, AMC will assume responsibility for the management of all the Army's war reserve stocks. During 
the past year, we have made considerable progress in getting equipment for two armored brigades loaded aboard 
the prepositioned afloat ships. 

A $55 million depot maintenance facility is near completion at the Charleston (S.C.) Shipyard where 
maintenance can be done for the prepo afloat stocks. 

To support the Army's goals of prepo afloat, AMC has loaded some 56,000 tons of ammunition on prepo 
ships that are loaded and ready for rapid projection of the Army's forces to any location in the world. 

To support environmental goals of the Army, AMC is developing new ways to recover and recycle munitions 
that would otherwise have to be burned or disposed of as hazardous waste. The Army will realize some savings 
where munitions can be reused and disposal costs avoided. 

Our primary goal for the future is to ensure that our soldiers have the best technology, equipment, and 
logistical support possible in 2010 or at any other time in the future. If we accomplish our goal, the Army's 
soldiers deployed on a rescue mission, a humanitarian mission, or a full scale combat mission will have the best 
chance of succeeding and returning home safely. 

At AMC, we continue to work on new technology and new ways to get the best weapons and equipment into 
the hands of our soldiers for any emergency that should arise now or in the future. 

The American people expect us to deliver the best, and AMC is committed to delivering it. 

Command Management AMCDCG 


Organization and Key Personnel 

Minor organizational restructuring occurred in 
FY94. With the departure of Dr. Richard Chait, 
Principal Deputy for Science/Chief Scientist in 
December 1 993, the office of the Principal Deputy for 
Technology and the office of the Assistant Deputy for 
International Cooperative Programs were merged. 
The functions of the Assistant Deputy for 
International Cooperative Programs now fall under 
the Principal Deputy for Technology (PDT). Mr. 
Michael Fisette was selected to fill the position of 
Principal Deputy for Technology in May 1994. The 
PDT also established three developmental positions 
to support the functions of his office. 1 

LTG John G. Coburn 
Dr. Kenneth J. Oscar 
Mr. Michael Fisette 
Mr. Arthur R. Keltz 
COL Gary A. Frenn 

Key Personnel 

Deputy Commanding General 
Principal Deputy for Acquisition 
Principal Deputy for Technology 
Principal Deputy for Logistics 
Executive Officer 

Steve Balint 
Shirley Sparks 
Carol Orr 
Nancy Matheny 
Ruth Feltner 
LTC Royce Boykin 
MAJ Paul Krause 
Jerry Barker 
Terry Capehart 

Other Personnel 

General Engineer 





Logistics Management Officer 

Acquisition Management Officer 

Administrative Officer 


The Office of the Principal Deputy for Acquisition (PDA) also experienced a change in FY94 with the 
retirement of Mr. Darold L Griffin on 1 April 1994. Dr. Kenneth J. Oscar was selected and assumed duties as 
the Principal Deputy for Acquisition on 3 April 1994. One long term professional development position was 
filled during FY94. 

No significant personnel turnovers were experienced in the Office of the Principal Deputy for Logistics 
(PDL). Two long term development positions were filled to support the PDL. 

A significant change occurred in the Office of the Deputy Commanding General with the retirement of LTG 
Leo J. Pigaty effective 1 September 1994. LTG John G. Coburn assumed duties as the Deputy Commanding 
General of Army Materiel Command as of 14 July 1994. 

The Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) authorizations for the Office of the DCG (ODCG) and 
AMC on policy and procedures related to the acquisition process as well as coordinating and managing the action 
of the individuals assigned on temporary, long term development assignments. All positions were filled at the 

Other offices reporting to the ODCG within Headquarters AMC are: Executive Director for Test, 
Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE); Executive Director for Conventional Ammunition; and Office 
of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization. 

'Unless otherwise noted, information in this section is taken from the Deputy Commanding General's historical 
submission for FY94. 

Command Management AMCDCG 


The year FY94 was a year of great change and great progress. Dr. Kenneth J. Oscar became the new 
Principal Deputy for Acquisition (PDA) with the retirement of Mr. Darold L. Griffin on 1 April 1994. 

During Mr. Griffin's approximately six months detail as Executive Director of the Department of Defense 
Process Action Team on Military Specifications and Standards, Mr. Joseph J. Spellman backfilled for him, 
successfully maintaining continuity of office operations. Mr. Spellman completed transfer of the billion dollar 
BIG CROW test facility from the Army Research Laboratory to the Test and Evaluation Command, established 
a second software engineering intern training program at the Missile Command, and negotiated and coordinated 
the signing of the first Educational Partnership Agreements at the AMC Headquarters Command level with 
Prairie View A&M University and Central State University. During FY94, the PDAs made significant progress 
in improving Army acquisition, maintaining a healthy industrial base, improving AMC business planning, and 
enhancing the capability of the Army engineering and scientific workforce. 

POD Process Action Team (PAT) on Military Specifications and Standards 

Mr. Griffin served as Executive Director of this DOD PAT chartered by Ms. Colleen Preston, Deputy 
Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition Reform. Under his leadership from October 1993 through March 
1994, the PAT produced a landmark report titled "Blueprint for Change" with 88 recommendations. Key 
recommendations were to adopt performance based standards and specifications, eliminate excessive contract 
requirements, implement new management tools, and change culture through training and new management 
approaches. Dr. William Perry, Secretary of Defense, strongly endorsed the report and all of its 
recommendations . 

Dr. Oscar continued the journey to acquisition excellence by directing the preparation of the Army 
Implementation Plan (AIP) for the Blueprint for Change recommendations. The AIP was completed, staffed, and 
endorsed to the field by Mr. Gilbert Decker, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development, and 
Acquisition), with individual field Master Action Plans due during the first quarter of FY95. 

Acquisition Reform 

Dr. Oscar continued initiatives to keep AMC in the forefront of acquisition reform in AMC, the Army and 
DOD. He serves on the executive committee for four DOD PAT's on various area of procurement and 
acquisition. Dr. Oscar reviewed and prioritized AMC initiatives, settling on a top ten list for intensive 
management emphasis. New initiatives in spare parts, modeling and simulation, requirements, and contract 
pricing are being pursued at his direction. 

AMC Business Planning 

The PDA is the AMC Executive Director for Business Planning. Mr. Stephen Balint reports to him and 
serves as the Director of Business Planning throughout AMC. The first set of Major Subordinate Command 
(MSC) and Separate Reporting Activity (SRA) business plans were completed and reviewed by the Office of the 
Deputy Commanding General (ODCG) during January through April 1994. The reviews provided lessons 


Command Management AMCDCG 

learned for improvement of the business planning process, discussion between the subordinate command the 
AMC Command Group on business conditions, and identification of systemic business issues for AMC. A 
Business Planning Workshop was also conducted to capture and exchange information among the AMC business 
planning offices on their experiences, successes and ideas. The AMC Executive Steering Committee was briefed 
in May and they supported continued use of business planning to align the AMC process as close as possible to 
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. 

Laboratory Joint Cross Service Group 

Under the oversight of the PDA, Mr. Stephen Balint of the ODCG staff supported the Department of the 
Army staff during over seven months of data collection, analysis and negotiations with the Navy, Air Force, and 
Office of the Secretary of Defense as part of the Laboratory Joint Cross Service Group (LFCSG). The object of 
the group was to develop alternatives for combining workload and resources of laboratory activities within the 
military departments which would be provided to the services for consideration in developing their 
recommendations for Base Realignment and Closure 1995 (BRAC 95). The scope of the term laboratory was 
expanded to include the Army Research Laboratory (ARL), all Research, Development and Engineering Centers 
(RDECs) and organizations that perform in-service engineering. The BRAC process was used to ensure 
objectivity and recommendations were delivered to the Director, Defense Research and Engineering as required. 

Modeling and Simulation 

In October 1993, the Chief of Staff, United States Army, requested AMC to study, make recommendations, 
and provide an implementation plan to reduce weapon systems acquisition cycle time through integration of 
modeling and simulation. A PAT convened at HQ AMC in January 1994 with oversight by the PDA, Mr. Griffin. 
The PAT provided its report and 45 recommendations in May 1994. Dr. Oscar initiated action to develop an 
implementation plan to focus on the important PAT recommendations. The implementation plan provided seven 
focused actions to institutionalize modeling and simulation throughout the Army. Report distribution is expected 
in November 1994. 

Su pport to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) 

The PDA's continued their support of diversity through oversight of recruitment and training as well as 
support for competition for national awards. Educational Partnership Agreements (EPA) were signed by Mr. 
Griffin and General Jimmy D. Ross, CG, AMC, with Prairie View A&M University (PVAMU) and Central State 
University (CSU). The EPA with PVAMU is the first agreement ever signed at the AMC HQ level. 
Manufacturing Science Centers were established at both schools. 

Engineer and Scientist (Non-Construction) Career Program 

The PDA serves as the Functional Chiefs Representative (FCR) for approximately 1 8,000 civilian engineers 
and scientists in the Army workforce. During Mr. Griffin's tenure, a new Software Engineering Center for 
software engineering interns was established at Huntsville, Alabama. Dr. Oscar initiated a complete revision of 
the Army Civilian Training, Education, and Development System (ACTEDS) for the engineer and scientist career 
program. This revision will improve technical development and integrate acquisition needs. 

Command Management AMCDCG 

Acquisition Training — Roadshows 

Roadshow III continued to complement the training provided during earlier Roadshow efforts. The major 
focus of Roadshow IH was to demonstrate and provide hands-on experience in the use of Functional Support 
Templates as tools for eliminating unnecessary functional requirements from solicitations. The training also 
stressed the need for improved acquisition strategies and encouraged the use of Partnering as an alternative 
disputes resolution technique. Seven, two-day Roadshow HI field visits to the major AMC contracting commands 
were conducted in FY94, following the one FY93 visit. A series of 25 visits to the smaller, non-systems 
contracting activities, dubbed Roadshow-Lite, and two Roadshows for Industry were also conducted this year. 

Sector Surveys 

During FY94 a major update of twelve industrial sector surveys was conducted. The sectors included: 
Satellite Communications, Radio Communications, Sensors, Wheeled Vehicles, Small Caliber Weapons, Tactical 
Missiles, Tracked Vehicles, Large Caliber Weapons, Electro-Optics, Chem-Bio Defense, Ammunition, and 
Helicopters. The surveys were conducted from March to August 1994. A macrometrics chart was generated, 
displaying the health of each sectors as strong, acceptable or weak. 

Non-Developmental Items (NDI) 

The PDA serves as Army NDI Advocate. Associate Advocates are established at AMC MSCs and other 
Army MACOMs. In March 1994 an Associate Advocates conference was held at the U.S. Army Simulation, 
Training, and Instrumentation Command (STRICOM). All FY93 NDI obligations measurement data was 
compiled and provided to DOD. The PDA initiated work on trying to decrease the burden and increase the value 
of the measurement process. The office was also successful in securing DOD funding of NDI Acquisition 
training, held at eight Army sites. DA Pamphlet 70-3 (to be published in December 1994) will include sections 
on NDI and Market Research for NDI. 

Activity Based Cost (ABC) 

Valuation Research had been previously contracted in FY93 to conduct a "Proof of Principle" test, to see if 
ABC would work in practice. To accomplish this objective, six mini-studies were conducted at AMC contractor 
facilities. A follow-on study was subcontracted to cover the Raytheon Missile Systems Plant, to allow for the 
Defense Contract Audit Agency to observe the ABC process for evaluation. The mini-studies were completed 
in April 1994 and ABC was approved for implementation by the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and 

Specifications and Standards 

Much of the year was dedicated to participation in working groups and conferences associated with the 
implementation of the recommendations of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Process Action Team 
on Military Specifications and Standards Report, "Blueprint For Change." The PDA prepared a guidance 
memorandum, signed by the CG, AMC and the Army Acquisition Executive, directing Army commanders, 
Program Executive Officers (PEOs) and Program Managers (PMs) to begin implementation of the same 
recommendations within their organizations. The PDA also prepared and submitted to DA the final update to 
DA Pamphlet 70-XX for the Army Standardization Program. An additional guidance memorandum was prepared 


Command Management AMCDCG 

and signed by the CG, AMC and Deputy ASA for Procurement to PEOs and PMs, emphasizing the use of 
international and national commercial specifications and standards. 


Mr. Joseph J. Spellman of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) continued in a long-term 
training/developmental assignment during FY94 at the request of Mr. Griffin. Mr. Mario Lucchese of the U.S. 
Army Test and Evaluation Command came on board in October 1994 for a one year term to replace Mr. 
Spellman, who is expected to return to ARL in January 1995. 


Logistics Power Projection 

Fiscal Year 1994 saw significant progress in the capability of the Army Materiel Command to support the 
logistical requirements of our Army. Numerous advancements were made and initiatives instituted which 
materially contributed to improvement of the logistics leg of the AMC Core Competency triad. These 
advancements and initiatives are discussed in detail below. In addition, the continuing value of AMC to the Army 
and the nation was clearly demonstrated during several successful overseas operations involving our military 
forces during the year. U.S. Forces deployments in support of relief operations in Zaire and Rwanda involved 
activation of the AMC Logistics Support Element (LSE). Both military and civilian members of the AMC family 
deployed to the African continent to assist in UN and civilian nongovernmental agency support of Rwandan 
refugees. In addition, members of the AMC LSE team continued support of ongoing operations in such diverse 
locations as Macedonia, Bosnia, and Somalia. As the year drew to a close, President Clinton directed American 
military forces to deploy to Haiti. Again, because of the outstanding reputation earned by AMC in previous 
worldwide logistics support operations dating back to Operation Desert Shield/Storm, the Command led the way 
through deployment of a fully staffed Joint Logistics Support Element which provided sustained support to 
American forces upon transfer of the operation from US to UN control. 

Army War Reserves (A WR) 

AMC assumed management and accountability of the Army War Reserves program on 1 October, 1994. 
The Industrial Operations Command was designated as the responsible agent for implementation and execution 
of the program. Management and control of specific stockpiles was initiated throughout the year and will 
culminate during Fiscal Year 1996 with the completion of AWR5 (Kuwait Training Set). 

Single Stock Fund (SSF) 

The testing, or Proof of Principle, for the Single Stock Fund was initiated at Fort Hood during Fiscal Year 
1994 and is expected to be completed in February of 1995. Preliminary indications are positive, with 
improvements seen in asset reutilization/redistribution and management integration of wholesale and retail stocks. 
In concert with the Strategic Logistics Agency, AMC began planning for the follow-on extension of the Single 
Stock Fund to the remainder of the Army. 


Command Management AMCDCG 

Total Asset Visibility (TAVVIn-Transit Visibility fITV) 

From a significant increase in the number of users to a greatly expanded visibility capability, the Total Asset 
Visibility program made notable progress during the year. Specifically, the number of users climbed from 2,000 
to 3,000 during the year and it is anticipated that upon complete fielding, the TAV program will have over 8000 
users Armywide. In addition, the viability of the system was proven during the deployment of U.S. forces to Haiti 
(Operation Restore Democracy) via the use of radio frequency and laser tags. This was a real world test of the 
In-Transit Visibility concept and allowed commanders and logisticians the ability to monitor the movement of 
sustainment stocks enroute from CONUS to Haiti in support of the operation. The success of the program has 
been recognized by OSD when in September they initiated a Joint Task Force to review integration of TAV/TTV 
throughout the Department of Defense. 

Consumable Item Transfer (CIT) 

As of the end of the year, approximately 92,500 Army consumable items had been transferred to the Defense 
Logistics Agency (DLA) since the inception of the program in FY91. It is anticipated that this action will be 
completed during the second quarter of FY95 when some 98,000 items will have been transferred. A second 
phase of the program is currently underway, having been directed by the Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of 
Defense (Logistics) (ADUSD(L)) in July of this year. As the year ended, a plan of action, complete with 
anticipated milestones, was in preparation to accommodate a second round of item transfers. This plan is 
expected to go to ADUSD(L) in November, 1994. 

Integrated Sustainment Maintenance (ISM) 

The Proof of Principle for the Integrated Sustainment Maintenance concept, begun at Fort Hood in November 
1993, ended on 31 July 1994. The 13th Corps Support Command (COSCOM) executed the duties of the 
regional sustainment manager with participation from Fort Hood, Fort Riley and Fort Carson. AMC worked with 
the COSCOM and provided an interface between depots and contractors both in the region and nationally. While 
the final results of the Proof of Principle were not fully analyzed by the end of the year, both HI Corps and Fort 
Hood have acknowledged the success of the concept. In anticipation of success, in March of this year AMC 
began planning for national implementation of ISM. Seven different Process Action Teams were formed to guide 
the implementation process. Concurrently, the Strategic Logistics Agency began preparation of a decision 
package for Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) approval for Armywide implementation. 

Training of Logistics Interns 

At the direction of the Principal Deputy for Logistics, the method of training interns for the Supply 
Management and Materiel Maintenance Management programs was reviewed. The purpose was to investigate 
potential alternatives to training these logistics interns at the School of Engineering and Logistics (SEL). A 
special in-depth study was conducted beginning in May of this year. Although final results of the study were not 
known by the end of the year, it is anticipated that changes would be made to the program. These will include 
transfer of program management responsibility from SEL to an alternate location and inclusion of "greening," 
or military orientation, into the program by placing civilian interns in appropriate logistics Officer Basic Courses 
with their military counterparts. In addition, establishment of a centralized proponency office for logistics intern 
training is anticipated. A final determination as to program direction is expected during early FY95. 


Command Management AMCDCG 

Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force (LAM) 

The AMC Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force continued to make significant contributions to both the 
Command and the Army throughout the year. The Logistics Anchor Desk (LAD) was initiated in February and 
introduced during Exercise Prairie Warrior '94. Consolidating data from multiple sources, it provides users at 
the tactical, operational and strategic levels with an accurate overview of the logistics battlefield. While the 
concept will continue to be refined as it matures, the LAD has already begun to emerge as a potential tool for the 
joint warfighting and logistics community. In addition, the Task Force represented AMC via participation in 
numerous Armywide operational exercises throughout the year such as Atlantic Resolve, Northern Lights, Ulchi 
Focus Lens, and Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration (RSOI). During these exercises, issues 
such as sustainment, TAV, ammunition distribution, prepositioned strategic stocks, and other AMC-managed 
logistics oriented programs were addressed, data collected, shortfalls identified and corrective efforts initiated. 

Depot Consolidation Issues 

Depot consolidation efforts continued throughout the year. The Communications-Security maintenance and 
supply mission transfer from Lexington-Bluegrass Army Depot to Tobyhanna Army Depot (TOAD) was 
completed in July. In February, all maintenance work at Sacramento Army Depot ceased, with some of the 
workload transferred to TOAD and the remainder to the Sacramento Air Logistics Center. The Tooele Army 
Depot (TEAD) realignment, directed by the BRAC 93 effort, continued throughout the year. In May, HQ AMC 
guidance concerning core workload necessitated some rework of the TEAD realignment. Nonetheless, it is 
anticipated that some eleven core systems will be transferred to Red River Army Depot with the remainder 
contracted out and the realignment completed by FY97. 


Technology Leveraging 

The Principal Deputy for Technology (PDT) has initiated several efforts to exploit external sources of 
Research and Development (RD). To provide a mechanism for technical interchange, the first AMC-RAND Day 
was conducted. This meeting provides a forum for AMC to provide greater input in RAND studies. AMC has 
combined with industry and academia to create the National Automotive Center and the National Rotorcraft 
Center. These centers will promote dual-use technologies and facilitate in and out technology transfer. 

Near-Term Technology Insertion 

The PDT chaired a Technology Insertion Conference with AMC/ARDEC Technical Directors and U.S. Army 
Forces Command (FORSCOM) Commanders. The conference, held at Fort McPherson in November 1994, was 
to bridge current FORSCOM material problems with available technology which could fix or improve the 
situation. The dialog among participants was excellent, focusing on issues of most interest to the Unit 
Commander, such as battery management, supply inventory, and lightening the soldiers load. While much of the 
Commanders' frustration was with acquisition and supply problems, there were several areas for potential near- 
term technical solutions which AMC could facilitate. 


Command Management AMCDCG 

AMC/User Interaction 

Several efforts were initiated to enhance partnering between AMC and the user. A Louisiana Maneuvers 
Technology Conference was held at Aberdeen, MD. A Future Technology Institute is being established at ARL. 
This institute will provide a formal mechanism for the user and researcher to collaborate on the direction of future 
(long term) R&D efforts. 

Army Research Laboratory (ARL) Interface 

The PDT chaired sessions of the ARL Board of Directors. The main purpose of this group representing 
RDEC Technical Directors and other ARL customers is to review ARL's Technical Base Program to ensure that 
at least 50 percent directly supports the RDEC requirements. 

The Federated Laboratory 

During FY94, the transition of ARL to a federated laboratory made significant progress. Concept approval 
was obtained from DA and a broad area announcement (BAA) was disseminated. The intent of the federated lab 
is to provide a scientific "crossroads" whereby the best of public and private sector researchers can be brought 
together to study areas of military interest. This "open" environment will also have an enhancing effect on 
technology transfer. 


During FY94 the position of Principal Deputy for Technology/Chief Scientist was changed to Principal 
Deputy for Technology with the additional duty as Executive Director for International Cooperative Programs. 
Mr. Michael Fisette was selected to fill this revised position. 

The PDT established an additional position in the Office of the Deputy Commanding General to support PDT 
functions. This brings the total developmental positions supporting the PDT to three. Personnel filling this 
positions during FY94 were Mr. Tom McVey, U.S. Army Missile Command Research, Development, and 
Engineering Center (MICOM RDEC), Ms. Susan Luckan, U.S. Army Chemical-Biological Defense Command 
(CBDCOM), and Mr. Wayne Grant, U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM). 

Change of Command. Chief of Staff. AMC 

On 28 January 1994, MG Johnnie E. Wilson left AMC to become the U.S. Army Deputy Chief of Staff for 
Logistics. His replacement was MG Ray E. McCoy, formerly the Deputy Director, Materiel Management, at the 
Headquarters, Defense Logistics Agency. 


Resource Management 





Organization_and Key Personnel ' 


Mil Civ 

Mil Civ 

Beginning 1 October 1993 



Military reported 
Military departed 
Retire / Reassign / Resign 
New employees 
Losses (Trans. / Reore.) 



-2 -44 

Sub Total 
DA Intern 

Management Engineering 
Activity (MEA) Employees 


+ 1 


Ending 30 September 1994 5 121 4 130 

Organizational Changes During FY94 



ADCSRM, Bdgt, Manpwr & 

Executive Officer 

Admin Office 

Cost Analysis Div. 

Prog. Bdgt. Funct. Anal. Div. 

Cmd. Anal. Prog. Bdgt. Div. 

Prog. Integration Div. 

Policy, Plans & Projects Div. 

Force Mgt Div. 

Structure Mgt Div. 

Staff Finance & Acct. Div. 

Business Resources Div. 

DCSRM Personnel 

BG Roger G. Thompson, to MTMC - 18 May 94. 
Robert O. Weidenmuller, Act. 19 May 94- 
Douglas Loomer, Act 19 Jun 94 - 
Cst Vacant, formerly Mr. Weidenmuller 
MAJ Johnny Ocasio 
Maxine Elbon 
Maryann Dominiak 
Philip Peters 
Richard Madson 
COL Edward K. Hutchison 
Robert Verbeke, Act. (formerly Douglas Loomer) 
David Blount 
Ronald Linthicum 
Thomas Gajda 
Steven Trimble 

HQ Reshape went into effect 3 April 1994. Under Reshape, DCSRM had to come down to a total of 125 
civilian and 5 military authorized spaces by FY95. Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) / Voluntary 
Separation Incentive Pay (VSIP) was available throughout the headquarters. DCSRM lost 45 employees to 
reassignments, retirements, and resignations. 

On 1 October 1993, the Cost and Economic Analysis Division merged with the Contract Cost Division. The 
new joint division's name is the Cost Analysis Division. On 28 November 1993 the Plans and Projects Division 
consisting of 1 2 employees disbanded. Eleven of the 1 2 employees remained in Resource Management, and one 
transferred to the Congressional Liaison Office. On 3 January 1994, Gary Tagtmeyer, one of the DCS's two SES 
employees retired. In April 1994 the Plans, Policy and Productivity Division changed their name to Policy, Plans 
and Projects Division. Because of the FY93 HQAMC Reshape initiative, the Chief of Staff approved the 
expansion of the newly formed Business Resources Division. It went from 1 1 authorized and on hand employees 
to 13. The Division required that these positions handle the new business areas in the Defense Business 
Operations Fund and Unit Cost system. Two GS- 14 employees filled the vacancies in November 1994. They 
had backgrounds in supply management and depot maintenance from the Plans and Policy Division that was 
disbanding. The Division also lost one GS-13 employee who accepted VSIP and retired in September 1994. 

AMC Automated Manpower Management Information System (AAMMIS) 

Program / Budget / Allocations (PBA) Module. The Command Budget Estimate (CBE) / Resource 
Management Update (RMU) preparation has successfully used this module for the last three years. However, 

1 Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the DCS for Resource Management 
historical Submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCRM 

continuing improvements and changes in both content and system operation required additional training. This 
classroom training took place at the Systems Integration Management Activity (SIMA) 20-21 April 1994. It 
included participants from Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs), Separate Reporting Activities (SRAs), and 
Unit Identification Codes (UIC). Some changes covered were the following: elimination of Full-Time Permanent 
(FTP) / Workyear data from the CBE, Army Management Structure Code (AMSCO) and Management Decision 
Package (MDEP) restructuring; and new HQDA guidance. It also covered system improvements like enhanced 
mass change options, more diverse query capabilities, and a reformatted Schedule 8 screen. Resource 
Management submitted system change requests to SIMA for. 

• Provisions for maintaining an AMC Program Budget Guidance (PBG) in AAMMIS. 

• Compilation of reimbursable reports. 

• Compilation of macro reports. 

Strength Management Module. To satisfy all users, Resource Management has decided to design this 
module with three options: 

• The Army Civilian Personnel System ( ACPERS) feeds into the manning document (either only initially 
or monthly). 

• Maintain the manning document manually or an automated feed from other software / Automated Data 
Processing (ADP) system. 

• Manual entry into a worksheet or an automated feed from other software / ADP system. 

These choices are necessary because no single method works for all users. For some activities, ACPERS data 
is fairly accurate. However, for activities serviced by Civilian Personnel Offices (CPOs) outside HQDA, the use 
of ACPERS would be necessary. This data is not always timely. With AMC's downsizing, it is imperative that 
actual strength is as accurate as possible, and Resource Management will structure AAMMIS accordingly. 
Current efforts for this module are to look again at the report structure and incorporate any necessary changes, 
and to start the programming effort as outlined above. 

The Cube 

The Cube is an automated management tool showing connectivity between the strategic framework, business 
planning and resources. It allows users to access command information in a matter of minutes. An array of 
display options is available that shows AMC capabilities, focus categories and resources. 

During FY94, additional data elements were added to the Cube. It can now be accessed by resource 
organization codes (ROC) and source codes (SC). Military workyears have also been added. ROC codes show 
the organization or agency where reimbursable dollars originate. Source codes show the color of dollars 
(appropriation) of the reimbursement. Military workyears are on the resource axis of the Cube. Also this year, 
the Cube received updates in resource data from the Program Budget Guidance and Budget Estimate 

U.S. Army Materiel Command DCSRM Command Reshape Effort 

The AMC Reshape Effort, begun in the summer of 1994, is an attempt to use the Cube to analyze which 
Command resources are used to do what work on which Army systems or products. The Command has ranked 


Resource Management AMCRM 

what work should be done, and HQDA has ranked Army systems or products. The Reshape Effort will identify 
how Command resources meet various priorities. This identifies resources committed to low priority systems 
or unnecessary processes enabling them to be examined for possible reallocation. 

Army Ideas for Excellence Program 

The AMC Army Ideas for Excellence Program (AIEP) achieved $28.2 million in benefits during FY94, an 
increase of $6 million over the previous year. Moreover, the benefit-to-award ratio increased from 47-1 to 59-1 . 
In FY94, the total number of ideas received decreased. However, AMC has submitted 93 ideas per 1000 
employees. This is more than the total Army (27 per 1000) and the Services' leader, Air Force (55 per 1000). 
An employee from AMCCOM won the Army Civilian Suggester of the Year, accomplishing $ 1 .8M in first year 
savings, $12M total savings. He proposed modifying excess Rockeye dispenser components for use in the 
production of Navy Gator Weapon System instead of purchasing new dispensers. 

Program Objective Memorandum (POM) 

AMC submitted the Commander's Statement on 16 December 1993, with enclosures, through the Chief of 
Staff, Army to the Secretary of the Army. It emphasized AMC's support of DA's Campaign Plan for America's 
Army of the 21 st Century and assessed AMC's capabilities to get there. It also highlighted AMC's critical issues, 
grouped under Army Functional Areas. These issues resulted from severe resource shortfalls in the face of 
constant or increasing requirements. 

Unfinanced Requirements (UFR) 

On 1 8 December 1993, the AMC DCG directed the DCSRM to develop a ranked listing of AMC's most 
critical UFRs in order of priority. DCSRM sent guidance to all MSCs, SRAs, and HQ AMC. In response, they 
identified a total of 124 UFRs with corresponding issue papers, broken into 201 increments over four 
appropriations. It totaled $709.6M. They were ranked through each phase of the process, culminating in an 
Executive Steering Committee (ESC) Video Teleconference (VTC). The entire process took place over the 
3-Comm Local Area Network (LAN) excluding the following: Resource Integration Council (RIC), Senior 
Resources Action Committee (Senior RAC) and the ESC. 

OMA Decrement Drill 

Based on the UFR drill, the DCSRM, on 18 February 1994, requested MSC Commanders develop and 
submit an executable decrement list equal to 6 percent of their respective OMA (Operation and Maintenance, 
Army) programs. Decrements were to ensure AMC had sufficient funds to pay for some high priority, must-fund 
UFRs: VERA / VSIP, Locality Pay raises, Supply Depot Operations and Second Destination Transportation 
(SDO / SDT) Major items. The list was used as the basis for a mid-year review to tell HQDA what specific items 
AMC could not accomplish without additional funding. 

GEN Ross' Farewell Dinner 

In late October 1993 the DCSRM became the proponent for GEN Ross' Farewell Dinner. He designated the 
Chief, Program Integration Division, as the lead and Committee Chairperson. The Chairperson established three 
subcommittees: Publicity, Facilities and Logistics, and Finance and Tickets. They staffed the committees solely 


Resource Management AMCRM 

with DCSRM personnel. Each DCS / staff activity had a point of contact for ticket sales. They held the very 
successful Farewell Dinner at the Fort Bel voir Officers' Club, 10 February 1994. An after action report was 
prepared on 16 March 1994 and provided to Protocol as the central repository. 

Command Budget Estimate (CBE) 

AMC submitted the Commander's Statement, dated 18 July 1994, with enclosures, through the CSA to the 
Secretary of the Army. It emphasized AMC's resource needs for FY96-7 and assessed AMC's capability to 
operate in peace as well as in time of conflict. It gave a special focus to AMC's capability to support two nearly 
simultaneous Major Regional Conflicts (MRC). It also highlighted unaffordable missions resulting from 
declining OMA funding without mission reductions. Without relief, AMC will be forced to transfer funds from 
depot maintenance, ammunition, and Supply Depot Operations / Second Destination Transportation. 

Fiscal Year 1994 Year-End Close 

Between 29 August and 13 October 1994, the AMC Command Group received seven weekly year-end close 
reports. These reports covered all AMC appropriations, incorporating data from both the HQ AMC staff and 
the MSCs. They highlighted both execution status and significant issues for staff and command group 

War Reserves Program 

The Program Budget Functional Analysis Division develops the OMA budget and financial management 
plans for the War Reserves program. This office also obtains required funding from HQDA and distributes 
reimbursable funds. The funds are for the receipt, storage, issue, and maintenance of Army War Reserves assets. 

U.S. Army Materiel Command Logistics Support Activity (LSE) 

Headquarters, Department of the Army (DAMO-FDF) approved the LSE idea on 2 February 1994. The LSE 
is a separate reporting activity that reports directly to Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC). The 
LSE is a multi-functional logistics command and control activity. With the ability to alter its mission as it 
supports the needs of the theater senior logistician. Desert Storm highlighted a need for well trained forward 
depot level maintenance and supply capabilities. The table of distribution and allowance (TDA) positions wer» 
based on actual Desert Storm deployment and consultations with AMC experts regarding the skill levels required 
to maintain certain pieces of equipment. 

The LSE is unique in that it does not require any new positions to create the organization. TDA positions 
will be taken from existing TDAs and identified as LSE through job descriptions. For deployment or natural 
disaster, the LSE-designated personnel will vacate their full-time position if the LSE needs their module or 

U.S. Army Strategic Mobility Logistics Base (SMLB) 

The Secretary of Defense approved the establishment of an Army Afloat Preposition Materiel Maintenance 
Site on 1 8 August 1 993. HQ AMC approved the idea of operation for the SMLB provisionally on 1 3 May 1 994. 
The SMLB manages, organically or through contracts, all CONUS port operations for AWR-3 afloat 


Resource Management AMCRM 

prepositioned equipment packages, sustainment stocks, and associated materiel. The SMLB became operational 
as of 1 October 1994. 

Inflation Guidance 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) develops inflation rate guidance which the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense (OSD) then refines for Defense application by the Services. HQDA prepares the Army's 
inflation indices and disseminates them to the Major Commands. AMCRM serves as the HQ AMC focal point 
for inflation and provides the indices to the MSCs, Project Manager Offices, and other installations and activities 
that need them. AMC uses them in pricing the Baseline Cost Estimates, Selected Acquisition Reports, Program 
Objective Memoranda, budget submissions, and other cost estimates. Resource Management distributed inflation 
indices by letter dated 7 February 1994 which replaced those issued in March 1993. A fifty-year period of 
historical and out-year data is displayed for four separate base years, with each appropriation on a single page. 

Economic Analysis (EA) 

Resource Management reviewed a large volume of EAs to determine the adequacy of the methodologies and 
techniques employed as well as the formatting from a technical point of view. The reviews encompassed many 
major programs such as Capital Investment, Information Management, Military Construction, and Production 
Base Support. The Production Base Support review conducted during FY94 consisted of 244 project reviews 
with a total value of $ 1 1 7.3M. Of these, 1 69 contained adequate EA application while the balance lacked either 
an acceptable EA / exemption or evidence of validation. Resource Management provided its review comments 
to the HQ program proponent, the DCS for Research, Development and Engineering (RDE), for resolution. 
Resource Management also provided policy and procedural guidance to HQ AMC elements and subordinate 
activities when required. 

AMC Capital Budget Program 

The Cost Analysis Division conducted a review of EA and the AMC Capital Budget program because of 
HQDA concerns. This included assessment of several AMC activities and resulted in documentation of study 
findings and recommendations. The DCSRM Business Resources Division, which has responsibility for 
administering the AMC Capital Budget Program, closely coordinated the work. The study focused on the 
application of economic analysis procedures within Depot System Command (DESCOM), Armament, Munitions 
and Chemical Command (AMCCOM), HQ AMC, HQDA, and OSD for the justification of projects in the DOD 
Capital Budget. Business Resources provided the results to AMC elements, the Army Cost and Economic 
Analysis Center, and the Army Budget Office. The study served to support follow-on development of EA policy 
and procedures for the DOD. 

Economic Analysis Policy for Capital Budget Projects 

The Cost Analysis Division and HQDA worked together in preparing policy and procedures supporting the 
DBOF Improvement Plan which is under the DOD Special Committee for Oversight of Policy Actions. The 
DOD Comptroller approved the policy during August 1994 for integration into DOD Financial Management 
Regulation 7000. 14-R and for DOD-wide application. Key points of the policy are that it: (a) requires that 
Capital Budget investments be based on sound analytical evaluations that provide sufficient support for decision 
making, budget submission, and program execution; (b) uses a threshold of $ 1 00,000 investment cost for 


Resource Management AMCRM 

performing conventional economic analysis and identifies an abbreviated cost comparison for projects under 
$ 1 00,000; (c) summarizes essential elements and formats for economic analyses and cost comparisons; (d) 
encourages prioritization of projects within each business area, considering net present value and economic 
indicators; (e) identifies two exemptions that may be claimed instead of an analysis and requires a validated 
justification statement; (0 highlights requirements for Capital Budget projects concerning automation information 
systems and functional program evaluations; (g) delineates summary information required in budget support 
documentation; and (h) requires that post-investment analyses be prepared on a representative sample of projects 
for each military activity per year. 

Operating and Support Cost Reduction Program (OSCR) 

The Army spends over half its budget, directly or indirectly, on the operation and support of its mission 
equipment. The OSCR program involves broad participation throughout the Army and its supporting industrial 
base to reduce these costs. Nine methodologies cover the entire product life cycle. AMC is the Army's Executive 
Agent for OSCR. In FY94, the AMC Cost Analysis Division was active in OSCR. Resource Management took 
the lead in writing many sections of the Exportable Training Package. AMCRM continued to refine the 
methodology for command-wide preparation of economic analyses to identify and justify candidates for OSCR 
funding. AMCRM continues to work with other Army activities and HQDA to carry out the program fully. 

Army Cost Review Board (CRB) 

The CRB reviews an analysis of the program offices' Life Cycle Cost Estimate (LCCE) and the Independent 
Cost Estimate (ICE) in order to prepare the Army Cost Position for the Assistant Secretary of the Army for 
Financial Management's (ASA(FM)) approval. During the past year, the Army convened CRBs for the Bradley 
Upgrade, Ml conversion, PAC3, AFAS / FARV, 2nd GEN FLIR, FSCATT, Javelin. 

Capital Budget 

In FY94, AMCRM made great strides toward the objective of consolidation of the DBOF Capital Budget. 
The DCS published an AMC-consolidated Capital Budget in a single source document for the first time. It also 
published a Capital Budget policy for the entire Command. Resource Management brought together the 
managers of all appropriations to establish priorities for the capital investment projects that represented the 
interests of the entire command. This was significant considering the FY95 $30.6 million reduction in the three 
business areas: Supply Management (Army), Depot Maintenance (Other), and Depot Maintenance, (Ordnance). 

Unit Costing of Ammunition 

Unit costing ammunition management functions began in November 1993 with a workshop held at HQ 
AMC. The newly-formed AMCCOM Product Line Management Team presented a detailed layout of the entire 
ammunition process. Building on that process, the team then developed a plan for establishing unit costing. A 
second Workshop in February 1994 at Rock Island succeeded in defining outputs and developing a draft plan. 
The establishment of a formal Unit Cost Working Group followed the workshop in March 1994. The Office of 
the Secretary of Defense (OSD) chaired the group. Members from HQDA, HQ AMC, Rock Island and the 
Executive Director of Conventional Ammunition (EDCA) also took part. Several video-teleconferences that 
summer helped them refine the plan and develop a new Army Management Structure (AMS) and report formats. 
OSD tasked the Defense Management Data Center (DMDC) to develop the unit cost reports. The final FY94 


Resource Management AMCRM 

workshop, held at HQ AMC in August, resulted in an OSD-approved plan, outputs, AMS code structure and 
report formats. Budget submissions under the new reporting structure are targeted for FY 95. 

DBOF Manpower 

DBOF end strength (ES) and expended workyears (WY) continued to decline because of overall Army budget 
and force structure reductions. Total FY94 AMC DBOF ES declined by 8.8 percent and WY by 1 1 percent. 

DBOF Depot Maintenance Other, and Depot Maintenance-Ordnance Business Areas 

Resource Management this year partially implemented policy decisions made in the DBOF Improvement Plan 
initiated by OSD this year. Financial policy improvements included a revision of the revenue recognition policy, 
capital depreciation policy and clarification of unit cost policy. These policy changes should improve DBOF 
financial operations over time. FY93 Business Realignment and Closure Committee (BRAC) decisions 
significantly affected three major maintenance depots: 

• Letterkenny Army Depot received a new mission for the repair of joint tactical missiles. The transfer 
of this workload will be completed in 1995. 

• Corpus Christi Army Depot received the additional mission of maintaining all rotary wing aircraft for 
all the services. 

• Sacramento Army Depot is curtailing depot mission activities predicated upon a BRAC decision to close 
the depot. The only remaining personnel are in support of base operations. By the end of 1995, 
projected end strength will be five personnel. 

The business area net operating results (NOR) for FY94 are as follows: 

• Depot Maintenance - Other incurred a negative NOR of $30.2M that is approximately $44M greater 
than planned. 

• Depot Maintenance - Ordnance incurred a negative NOR of $8.2M that is $7M greater than planned. 

Su pply Management. Army (SMA) 

For FY94, AMC successfully executed its wholesale SMA program meeting its financial and inventory 
replenishment targets. It also generated almost $4.3B in sales (within 2 percent of the beginning of the year 
forecast). This was achieved while providing significant and responsive support to U.S. / U.N. operations in 
Rwanda, Bosnia, and Haiti. 

Return of Prior Year OMA Funds for Currency Fluctuation 

During FY93, HQDA assessed AMC $21M for foreign currency fluctuation. It assessed all subordinate 
activities and separate reporting activities that had unliquidated obligation balances on 30 September 1994. The 
activities returned funds to AMC to meet their assessment. AMC paid to HQDA the foreign currency fluctuation 
assessment in April 1994. 


Resource Management AMCRM 

AMC Accountant Awards Program 

This year was the first year AMCRM recognized outstanding AMC employees working in the finance and 
accounting area as managerial accountants. In the prior 1 1 years, AMCRM gave out five awards. Since Defense 
Management Report Decision (DMRD) 910 consolidated accounting functions, AMCRM has no systems or 
operating accountants in the AMC community. Therefore, Resource Management only presents three awards 
now. The most prestigious is the 'Tom Gerety Award" for the outstanding accountant in AMC. That award 
recognizes contributions that have benefited the entire AMC community. The DCS received no nominations for 
the Gerety award this year. Next is the award for the Outstanding Staff Accountant of the year. It recognizes 
contributions benefiting the recipient's installation. This year's winner was David L. Hoffman of DESCOM. The 
final award is for the Outstanding Non-accountant in a Support Role. This year's award went to Jacqueline 
Renna, an accounting technician from the U.S. Army Communications- Electronics Command (CECOM). 

FY 94 Year End Accounting Closeout 

Resource Management conducted the FY94 close out nearly flawlessly. Defense Finance and Accounting 
Service (DFAS) Tobyhanna, formally AMC Accounts Office, successfully consolidated the FY94 accounting 
reports for AMC. MG Ray McCoy, AMC's Chief of Staff, certified the AMC reports. The reports were then 
hand delivered to DFAS-Indianapolis Center. 

Closing Appropriations 

Army Materiel Command entered FY94 with $346.9 million balance in accounts to be closed 30 September 
1994. With the MSCs' support, AMC reduced the closing accounts to $1 .9 million at 30 September 1994. This 
effort precluded the Army from using subsequent current fiscal year monies to fund closed appropriations 

Unmatched Disbursements (UMDs) 

Because of heavy Congressional interest, the Under Secretary of the Army established goals to reduce 
unmatched disbursements. Congress believes the Army is not matching disbursements to obligations in a timely 
and accurate manner. Therefore, AMC is overpaying contractors and paying for materiels but does not receive 
the required items. The AMC goal was to reduce UMDs to $190.2 million by 30 June 94. AMC achieved and 
exceeded the goal, $92.6 million to be exact. By exceeding its goal, AMC helped the Army to achieve the UMDs 
goal established by the Under Secretary of Army. 

Deployment of Electronic Timekeeping System (ETS) Throughout Headquarters AMC 

The Headquarters U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC) completed conversion from manual to electronic 
timekeeping on 1 1 July 1994. This conversion, begun July 1993, was suspended due to communication problems 
between the host computer (Aberdeen Proving Ground) and HQ AMC. The diligence of both APG and HQ AMC 
Directorate of Information Management (DOIM) personnel solved the communications problems by March 1994. 
DCSRM, with DCSPER and DOIM, began a six-phase training program to train every timekeeper and approving 
official in the ETS. Thanks to the personnel from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service - APG, the 
training occurred on schedule from March-July 1994. 


Resource Management AMCRM 

One cannot overstate the benefits derived from the HQ AMC conversion to the ETS. HQ AMC avoided 
costs of approximately $60,000 previously incurred for manual keypunch contracts for entering time and 
attendance (T&A). 

HQ AMC converted to ETS in time to convert to the Defense Civilian Payroll System (DCPS) - currently 
scheduled for March 1995. The DCPS requires a "front-end" automated T&A system. HQ AMC reduced 
unnecessary time and labor costs associated with manual timekeeping. In the current era of downsizing, 
conservation of limited personnel resources is essential. Approximately 300 HQ AMC employees are involved 
in some aspect of ETS, either as a primary or alternate timekeeper or approving official. The CG AMC 
recognized 18 employees with awards for their contribution to the ETS deployment. 

Budget Issues 

The Army Materiel Command closed out FY94 with direct obligations totaling $2,566 billion. This was a 
reduction of $356M from FY93 level of $2,922. This reduction was in line with Congressional and Department 
of the Army directed cuts. 

AMC received requests to provide contingency operations funding to support U.S. and U.N. operations in 
Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Haiti and Kuwait. AMC also received instructions to fund, within current resources, 
several new missions, and absorb locality pay raises, and VSIP costs. In all, the Army staff directed more than 
$123 million with no additional funds. 

Development of the Resource Allocation Model (RAM) continued in FY94. AMCRM changed the model 
to include only the workload under Activity Group 42 - its mission accounts. The DCS adjusted FY94-00 
funding based on the most recent data. The RAM was also used in sessions with senior Army and DOD 
leadership to display how AMC uses the workload in its civilian reshape efforts. 

Pay of people continues to be a problem for AMC and the rest of the Army. The Voluntary Separation 
Incentive Pay (VSIP) program which began in FY93 and continued in FY94, has proven to be a valuable tool to 
reduce the AMC workforce without involuntary separations. 


Resource Management AMCEN 



Organization and Key Personnel 

The DCS was headed by Colonel Mark W. Potter. His key subordinates were David Abdelnour, the ADCS 
for Engineering, Housing, Environment, and Installation Logistics; LTC Michael Monroe, Chief, Environmental 
Quality Division; Herbert Louque, Chief of the Engineering and Housing Division; Stanley Fried, Chief of the 
Real Estate Management Division; and Colonel Wallace Mook, Commander, USAMC Installation and Services 
Activity, Rock Island, IL. The organization is comprised of 44 civilians and 4 military at the headquarters and 
82 civilians and 1 military at the Installation and Services Activity. An organization chart is below. 1 

DCS for Engineering, Housing, Environment, & Installation Logistics. COL Potter, Mr. Abdelnour. 

• Engineering and Housing Division. Mr. Louque 

• Environmental Quality Division. LTC Monroe 

• Real Estate Management Division. Mr. Fried. 

• AMC Installations & Services Activity, Rock Island, Illinois. COL Mook, Mr. Cole. 

• • Business Management Division. Ms. Flemming. 

• • Facilities Engineering and Construction Division. Dr. Tredea. 

• • Equipment Management Division. Mr. Johnsen. 

• • Engineering Management Division. Mr. Delk. 

• • Supply Management Division. Mr. Bird. 

• • Environmental Compliance Division. Mr. Wahlig. 

The organizational structure revolves around four primary functions. They are Engineering and Housing, 
Environmental Quality, Real Estate, and Installation Logistics. Originally the headquarters staff was designed 
to provide planning and programming support to the MSCs and the Installations and Services Activity (I&SA) 
provided technical support in each functional area. The downsizing of the AMC headquarters required some 
planning and programming functions to be transferred to the Installation and Services Activity, including all of 
installation logistics. A detailed breakout of the four primary functions follows. Items in italics are performed 
by AMC I&SA, while those in bold are performed jointly by IS&A and AMCEN. 


Construction Staff AST Visits 

MCA / UMMC A Management Fire Protection 

BRAC Construction Engineering ADP I Standard Systems 

Facility Reduction Contracting 

Chemical Stockpile Disposal Facility I Energy Assistance Visits 

Construction Project Review I Technical Support Real Property Maintenance Activity Data Collection 

Master Planning child Care Support 

Installation Master Plans Family Housing Management 

Complete Investment Strategy Planning 

Installation Status Reports Construction 

Mobilization Master Plans 801 / 802 / 3D Party 

Real Property Maintenance Activity Family Housing Maintenance 

Real Property Maintenance Activity Resource Management Requirements 

Real Property Maintenance Project Management Resourcing 

'Unless otherwise noted all information in this section comes from the FY94 AMCEN Historical Submission. 


Resource Management 


Family Housing Operations 
Policy / Guidance 

Conversions / Diversions 
HSG Justification 
GFOQ Requirements 
HSG Management ADP 


Installation Compliance 

Overall Management (Reports) 

Multi-Media Audits 

Environmental Awards 
Installation Restoration 

PGM Resources (DERA Workplan) 

National Priority List / IAGS 

Assessments / Studies / Cleanup Actions 

NEPA Documents 

Installation Actions (BRAC) 
Pollution Prevention 

HAZMIN Progress Reports 

HAZMIN Requirements 

Pact RDTE Proponency 
Natural Resources 

Resource Management 

Endangered Species 

Fish and Wildlife 




Legacy Resources 

Integrated Training Area Management 
Special Assistance Visits 
AMC HQ Media Support 
Energy Conservation Program 
Environmental Automation Support 
Acquisition Assessment 

Impact Statements 

Materiel Needs 

Acquisition Pollution Prevention 
User Guidelines 

Real Estate Utilization 

Disposal, Acquisition, Leasing, Outgrant 

Budget Management 


Supervision of Field Elements 
Cultural Resource 

Preservation Program 
Housing for Homeless 
Legislative Matters 
Management of Records 


Supply Management 

MGE AMC Retail Supply Programs 

Technical Assistance 

Retail Supply Policy Guidance 

Command Supply Management Reviews (CSMR) 
Equipment Management 

Equipment Authorization Documentation 

IEMS Functional Proponent 

Technical Assistance 

Policy I Guidance 

Command Equipment Management Program Review (CEMPR) 

Administrative Transport Management Survey (ATMS) 

Equipment Survey Program 

Redistribute Excess Installation Equipment 

AMC Equipment Management Program 

Mobile Equipment Maintenance Expenditure Limit Waivers 

Government License Plates 

Army Maintenance System I Data Reduction Center 

Army Oil Analysis Program 

Mobile Equipment Requirements I Maintenance Reports 
Maintenance Cost Red 

Troop Food Services 

Perf. Work Statement Certification 

Commissary Support 

Program Management Review 



The organizational structure and mission in support of AMC facilities was not significantly changed in FY94. 
This organization continues to manage the Real Property Maintenance Activities which includes Real Property 
Management, Military Construction Army, Master Planning, and Family Housing Programs. 

Military Construction. Army Program. 

The Army budget for FY94 included nine AMC Military Construction, Army (MCA) projects totaling 
$153.3M. These included: 


Resource Management AMCEN 

• Aberdeen Proving Ground Target Assembly & Storage Facility, $ 1 .8M 

• Upgrade Vulnerability Range Complex, $4.45M 

• Anniston Army Depot Chemical Munitions Demilitarization Complex, $1 10.9M 

• Dugway Proving Ground Life Sciences Test Laboratory, $16.5M 

• Fort Monmouth Satellite Control Systems Addition, $7.5M 

• Hawthorne Army Ammunition Plant Container Loading Pads, $7M 

• Tobyhanna Army Depot Water Pollution Abatement, $0.75 M 

• Tooele Army Depot Treaty Compliance Facility, $1 .5M 

• White Sands Missile Range Target Track, $2.9M 

Congress supported all of the above projects and added the following: 

• Aberdeen Proving Ground Child Development Center, $ 1 .45M 

• Hawthorne Army Ammunition Plant Rail Line Rehabilitation, $4.7M 

• Picatinny Arsenal Explosive Development Facility, $6.1M 

• Warhead Development Facility, $4.4M 

• White Sands Missile Range Child Development Center, $3.3M 

The resultant final program supported by the Congress and signed by President Clinton into law provided 
two chemical demilitarization projects ($1 12.4M), one environmental must-fund project ($0.75M) and eleven 
mission-support/ revitalization projects ($60. 1M), for a MCA total of $173.25M. 

During FY94, approximately 1 00 technical reviews were conducted of design criteria packages, concept 
designs and final designs in addition to other intermediate design reviews. The AMC I&SA was instrumental 
in having the innovative "Charrette" process applied to initial development of the design for the Software 
Engineering Center Annex project at Redstone Arsenal. Coordination among AMC, Corps of Engineers, and 
Architecture / Engineer designers developed concept design for this project, on schedule, through application of 
this intensive process which was used for the first time on an AMC project. 

A major emphasis was directed for MCA projects to develop the Strategic Mobility Logistics Base (SMLB) 
at the Naval Weapons station, Charleston, SC. The Army Strategic Mobility Program project and Chemical 
Demilitarization projects constitute the majority of FY95 and out year MCA program, in addition, I&SA has 
assisted DESCOM in the development of an overall operational scheme for the SMLB. 

AMC's portion of the FY95 Army budget for Miliary Construction, Army (MCA) was devastated during the 
final OSD/OMB review, decrementing ten mission support projects ($88.35M or 93 percent of total revitalization 
funds available to AMC) with significant impacts on AMC's capability to maintain the technological advantages 
in support of the Army's missions. The only projects emerging unscathed were chemical munitions 
demilitarization complexes at Pine Bluff Arsenal ($97M) and Umatilla Depot Activity ($179M), and a BRAC 
91 -associated Research & Development Computer Center ($6.6M) at the Adelphi Laboratory Center. Projects 
cut from FY95 were: 

• Aberdeen Proving Ground Simulation and Computational Analysis Lab, $24M 

• Adelphi Laboratory Center Hi-Power Microwave Research Facility, $8.3M 

• Crane Army Ammunition Activity Metal Parts Plating Facility, $2.1M 
Natick Laboratory Expand Food Laboratory, $2.45 M 



Resource Management AMCEN 

• Pine Bluff Arsenal Quality Evaluation Laboratory, $15M 

• Price Support Center Chapel / Child Development Center, $3.45M 

• Redstone Arsenal Physical Fitness Center, $2.6M 

• Rock Island Arsenal Electric Distribution System, $4.65 M 

• White Sands Missile Range Climatic Test & Evaluation Facility, $10.8M 

• Yuma Proving Ground Target Recognition Range, $ 1 5M 

During Congressional review of the FY95 budget, a number of AMC MCA projects were suggested as 
potential changes to the budget. Final Congressional actions resulted in restoration of the Redstone Arsenal 
Physical Fitness Center ($2.6M) plus the addition of an Electric Distribution System upgrade at Aberdeen 
Proving Ground, ($2.6M); an Industrial Operations Facility at Tobyhanna Army Depot, ($17M); and, a Strategic 
Mobility Maintenance Complex (Increment 1 , $20M) at the Charleston, SC Naval Weapons Center. Congress 
supported the Chemical demilitarization projects but directed the funding for such projects be moved from MCA 
to the Military Construction, Defense (MCD) program. The final program approved by the Congress and signed 
into law by President Clinton thus provided only five mission- support projects for a total of $48.8M. 

Master Planning 

The facilities master planning program this year was heavily involved in Base Realignment and Closure 
(BRAC), and two initiatives under development by HQDA. 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 

BRAC I continues to affect numerous AMC installations and this office. Tasks required include preparing 
and processing MCA project documentation for facilities construction and infrastructure requirements to 
accommodate realigned activities and missions. Twenty-one BRAC I projects were programmed over FY91- 
FY93. Eight projects have been completed, ten are under construction, one is awarded with construction to start 
soon and two are under design. 

BRAC 91 consists of eight projects at four installations during FY93-FY95. Four are under construction, 
one is awarded with construction to start soon, one is under design and two (late additions) are awaiting authority 
to start design. 

To implement Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 93, eight construction-renovation projects totaling 
$59 million were identified and programmed. All of the projects are on a "fast-track" schedule; i.e., seven in the 
FY95 and one in the FY94 BRAC Military Construction Program. 

Five of the projects, four at Fort Monmouth ($47 .OM) and one at Detroit Arsenal ($5.0M), are for laboratory 
and administrative facilities to house employees and missions now in leased space or at Vint Hill Farms Station, 
Fort Monmouth's Evans Area and Fort Belvoir. 

Remaining projects are for missile and electronic depot maintenance facilities at Letterkenny (two projects: 
FY94 $4.5M and FY95 $1.7M) and Tobyhanna Army Depots ($0.6M), respectively. 

Congressional Notifications were made during the first / second quarters of FY94; all projects were under 
design at year's end. 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Real Property Master Planning 

Neither HQDA or HQ AMC provided funding for development of AMC installation's Real Property Master 
Planning (RPMP) documents. However, the installations did work on the following documents during this period: 

• Adelphi Laboratory Center - Master plan update 

• Charles Melvin Price Support Center ~ Land Use Plan, Future Development Plan and Real Property Master 
Plan Utilities Analysis 

• Aberdeen Proving Ground - Comprehensive RPMP Needs Assessment (completed); Capital Investment 
Strategy for Barracks; RMAT 

• Crane AAP - Master plan update (completed). 

• McAlester AAP - Master Plan Update 

• Pine Bluff Arsenal - Long Range Plan and Capital Investment Strategy 

Also, a new initiative called Installation Decision Architecture (IDA) was under development at HQDA. 
The HQ AMC Master Planning Team presented a "big picture" briefing of IDA at the FY94 AMC Engineer 
Workshop, Rock Island Arsenal (explained how the pieces fit together and what needs to done (an AMC FARA) 
since IDA and its building blocks may become "the tool" for future RPMA/MILCON resource management. 

Mobilization (Contingency) Master Planning 

Mobilization (Contingency) Master Planning (MMP) studies continued to focus on helping provide direction 
for the radical changes, within the Army's industrial base, necessitated by rapidly changing readiness requirements 
and reduced budgets. The MMP infrastructure and environmental readiness studies filled a critical, yet otherwise 
unavailable, need at our installations by helping to address those changes. For example, they played a key role 
in enabling the U.S. Army Armament, Munitions, and Chemical Command to re-evaluate its readiness and 
contingency workload requirements across the Government-owned ammunition industrial base. The resultant 
plan, Ammunition Facility Strategy for the 21st Century (AMMO FAST-21) provides a "roadmap" for 
reconfiguring the industrial base to a smaller size with greater flexibility while maintaining the capability for 
providing today's peacetime ammunition requirements and tomorrow's technologically improved ammunition 

Ongoing studies during the fiscal year included MMP Updates at Radford AAP and Letterkenny Depot as 
well as utility studies at Lake City AAP (water / sewer), Pine Bluff Arsenal (steam / compressed air), Radford 
AAP (steam), Red River AD (water / steam), Holston AAP (elect) and Iowa AAP (water). An Environmental 
Readiness Study at Lonestar AAP was completed in March. 

Also during this period, the AMC Mobilization Planning Support Cell, 416th Engineer Command started 
the review of Lonestar AAP's Statement of Work for the purpose of recommending changes to help optimize 
resource expenditures. 

Installation Status Reports 

A new HQDA initiative, tested within the AMC community, is called Installation Status Reports (ISR). The 
initiative's ultimate purpose is to improve the quality of Army facilities by measuring infrastructure, environment, 
and service readiness. AMC test sites are Rock Island Arsenal, Natick Research, Development, and Engineering 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Center, Anniston Army Depot, Redstone Arsenal, and Aberdeen Proving Ground. ISR is a significant "feeder" 
system to the Installation Decision Architecture (IDA) initiative also being developed at HQDA. The IDA is a 
tool to be used by HQDA to develop base operations budgets in the coming budget cycles and will be critical to 
Major Command (MACOM) Base Operations (B ASOPS) budgets. 

Army Family Housing Funding (AFH) 

The AFH maintenance program was reduced by nearly 50 percent this year. This level of funding precluded 
nearly all but safety and health related repairs to housing units. Reprogramming between AFH accounts 
continues to hamper housing managers. Currently, all reprogramming has to be accomplished by HQDA by the 
Program Budget Accountability System (PBAS). HQDA is reluctant to power down this authority to MACOMs 
and below. Additionally, PBAS is not fully fielded to all AMC installations. Installations want to be empowered 
to spread their AFH resources where they need them in order to do a better job. 

Army Family Housing Funding Construction 

In FY93 there were two installations which had AFH construction projects. Redstone is replacing 120 
Wherry units, awarded at $9.7M, and Letterkenny is upgrading the heating systems and adding air conditioning 
in 24 substandard units, awarded at $950K. At the end of FY94 the construction for these two projects were 
about 60 percent complete. In FY94 there were four projects at Aberdeen Proving Ground programmed for a 
total of $6.4M, two were awarded in September 1994 and two are being solicited by the Baltimore District. 
White Sands MR also has a FY94 Whole Neighborhood Revitalization project which was awarded for 50 
dwelling units at $2.8M. 

Divestiture of Army Family Housing Dwelling Units 

With operations and maintenance funding being cut in half it was imminent that a divestiture plan would be 
required. Therefore, in FY94, this command took a pro-active stance in attempting to provide the best possible 
dwelling units for our soldiers by evaluating all options available under reduced funding. Divestiture allows us 
to reduce our inventory of older units, which are in poor condition or expensive to operate and maintain, and those 
units which are excess to our needs. The divestiture plan showed AMCEN could reduce our present housing 
inventory of 8,280 units in FY93 by 149 units in FY94, 160 units in FY95, 341 units in FY96, 548 units in 
FY97, 447 units in FY98, 17 units in FY99, and 352 units in FY00 and beyond. This would bring our family 
housing inventory to a maximum of approximately 6,000 dwelling units ending FY00. 

Real Property Management Activities 

The single most significant issue facing Facilities Management during FY94 was the funding shortfall at 
RDTE funded installations. The Proving Grounds, Missile Range, and Laboratories / RDECs were funded at 47 
percent of the maintenance, repair, and minor alteration Annual Recurring Requirement this year (as compared 
to an Army goal of 85 percent). Only 94 percent of the environmental compliance "must fund" needs were 
funded. Field commanders reallocated from other programs to fill the difference. As a result of past funding 
levels and current POM projections, RDTE facilities are in the worst condition in the Army and will worsen. The 
current Backlog of Maintenance and Repair is approximately $1 1 .45 per square foot versus the Army average 
of $ 1 .46. The RDTE funding levels provide substandard facilities ill-equipped to maintain quality of life, safety 
and health. The total Directorate of Public Works (DPW) costs for FY93 as reported through the FY93 Technical 


Resource Management 


Data Feeder Report process were $934.6M, a 16 percent reduction from FY92. This information was gathered 
and reported during the 1 st and 2nd Quarters of FY94. The FY94 guidance allows the use of obligations instead 
of costs and will have no reporting of BMAR data in FY94. 

Unconstrained Requirements Reporting 

FY94 ushered in a new era for Unconstrained Requirements Reporting. Based on changes in DA reporting 
requirements as a result of the Army's Business Practices Committee, FY94 was an update only year for the 
Unconstrained Requirements Report. The reports are now required biennially in synch with the 2-year budget 
cycle. Updates during the off years are optional and no AMC installation provided optional inputs. 

Lead-Based Paint (LBP) 

Lead-based Paint (LBP) became an issue during the year because of recent legislation and the massive 
number of Army family housing units built before the use of LBP became restricted in 1978. AMC is represented 
on the Army LBP Team and the LBP risk management effort has been initiated throughout AMC. Actions began 
with an initial requirement to assess LBP risks at facilities in AMC which could expose children 6 years old and 
younger to LBP risk. Subsequently, the AMC LBP Team was chartered and has been formed. In conjunction 
with this, installation level LBP Teams are being formed to conclude the assessment process and to prepare risk 
management plans. 

Facilities Engineering / Energy Program Reviews (FE/EPR) 

A total of 18 Facilities Engineering / Energy 
Program Reviews were conducted at the following 
AMC installations during FY94: 

Charles Mel v in Price Supt Ctr 

Holston AAP 

McAlester AAP 

Pine Bluff Arsenal 

Redstone Army Support Activity 

Seneca AD 

Sunflower AAP 

Tooele AD 

Volunteer AAP 

Fort Monmouth 
Jefferson Proving Ground 
Natick RDEC 

Pueblo Army Depot Activity 
Riverbank AAP 
St. Louis AAP 
Tacom-Detroit Area 
Vint Hill Farms Station 
Yuma Proving Ground 

During the year program ratings were eliminated 
as a result of installation comments. However, FE / 
EPRs are still conducted as both compliance reviews 
and assistance visits to the installations. Visits are 

staffed and tailored to the specific installation's needs in recognition of reduced staffs, mission changes and 
closure operations. Emphasis was placed more on assisting the installations with current operations and with the 
staffing and activation of new organizational structures than on administrative / regulatory issues. 

Special Assistance Visits 

Fort Monmouth McAlester AAP 

Picatinny Arsenal Rock Island Arsenal 
White Sands Missile Range 

Natick RDEC 

Vint Hill Farms Station 

Yuma Proving Ground 

I&SA conducted Special Assistance Visits at 
Savanna ADA, Stratford Army Engine Plant, and 
Seneca ADA to resolve problems with roof trusses 
and structural components. A special team visited 

U.S. Army Research Laboratory- Watertown to provide recommendations for closure operations. There were 
eight unannounced Child Development Center inspections conducted by the MACOM Child Care Evaluation 
Team with I&SA participating at the listed locations. 


Resource Management AMCEN 

These inspections are required by the Military Child Care Act of 1989. The Natick RDEC inspection was 
a pre-occupancy inspection of the new CDC facility there. 

Over 100 maintenance and repair projects were reviewed for technical sufficiency. Many of these were 
energy management and energy conservation candidate projects. Other areas of RPMA management include dam 
and bridge safety programs, monitoring of airfield navigational aide inspections and certification of AMC railroad 
track inspectors. 

Facilities Training Workshop 

The 1994 AMC Facilities Training Workshop was conducted 9-12 May 1994 to support RPMA throughout 
AMC. Over 140 persons attended representing DA, AMC, MSCs, installations, Corps of Engineers, and the 
Center for Public Works. Briefings were presented on RPMA issues to include funding, master planning, real 
estate, military construction, fire prevention and protection, energy programs, environmental documentation, 
AFH, and Defense Performance Review. Demonstrations and displays were provided on Computer Aided 
Drafting Design / Geographic Information Systems, Computerized Maintenance Management Systems, the Corps' 
Automated Review Management System and Corps research areas. 

Standard Design Reviews 

Standard Design reviews were conducted and included a review of standard designs for barracks, CDCs, fire 
stations, and hazardous waste material storage facilities. A value Engineering Study of the Barracks Standard 
Design was conducted with I&SA participation. 

Facility Reduction Program (FRP) 

Facility Reduction Program (FRP) efforts resulted in the demolition of 90.900 square feet of buildings at a 
cost of $36.4 million. The AMC FRP requirement in FY94 was 1 .2 million square feet with an estimated cost 
of $36.4 million. 

Fire Prevention and Protection Program 

The Fire Protection Specialist has accepted another job and left at the end of the year. Recruitment action 
is under way to fill the position. Fire prevention inspections were conducted at 10 Child Development Centers 
in compliance with the Military Child Care Act of 1989. During FY94, one fire investigation, a training 
conference, and eight special FP&P visits were conducted. Nine construction projects were reviewed for fire 
protection adequacy. The annual AMC Fire Protection Awards Program was conducted with 22 entries received. 

A total of sixteen Fire Protection Operational ARL Charles Meivin Price s P t Qr 

. Corpus Christi AD Crane Army Ammunition Activity 

readiness Inspections were conducted. Ratings Lima Army Tank Plant McAiesterAAP 

included seven Excellent, eight Satisfactory, and one Mississippi aap Natick rdec 

Marginal. Understaffing of FP&P Departments J^Z^aap s^ada 

resulting from the downsizing currently taking place is Stratford Army Engine Plant tacom 

a major concern . In addition, fire protection systems Whlte Sands Missile Ran & e volunteer aap 
were found to be inoperable and not being maintained 
at several installations. Inspections were conducted at the listed locations. 


Resource Management 




The Army Environmental Strategy for the 21st Century, developed in FY92, continued during FY94. The 
four major environmental program areas; compliance, restoration, prevention and conservation, caused the AMC 
environmental quality program to be organized the same way. AMC has accepted the challenge to be a leader 
in the Army and in DOD environmental stewardship. The HQ AMC Environmental Management Action Group 
(EMAG) is the command group forum to deal with these environmental quality program areas as they effect each 
of the mission areas of the command. They meet quarterly to deal with issues from the field. 

The Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC) has caused an additional environmental workload to comply 
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, and time-sensitive site cleanup activities. 
Hazardous waste site cleanups at BRAC installations, as well as at active installations, are exacerbated by 
regulatory agency and public citizens' priorities for action. Interim remedial measures and removal actions are 
undertaken to mitigate imminent threats while long range, complex investigations proceed to define requirements 
for permanent solutions. 

Environmental Compliance Program Execution 

The Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Water Act (CWA) amendments in 1992 and the regulations 
implementing the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA also referred to as 
Superfund), all had major impacts on the command's environmental status during FY94. TSCA regulates 
manufacturing, use and importation of chemical substances, including Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCBs). RCRA 
and CERCLA address the management of land disposal of hazardous waste. Under RCRA, AMC is spending 
several millions of dollars annually to obtain RCRA Part B hazardous waste permits. While many Part B permits 
are approved, to date, no permits from Open Burning / Open Detonation (OB / OD) of explosive waste having 
been approved. All OB / OD sites operate under interim permits. Under CERCLA, problems at installations 
with groundwater contamination are quite pervasive. 

Environmental Compliance Assessment System (ECAS) 

The ECAS is an Army directed review program 
to assess installations for compliance with all 
applicable Federal, State, local, and Army 
environmental laws and regulations. For AMC, these 
reviews are conducted once every 4 years at each 
installation by the USAMC Installations and Services 
Activity (AMC I&SA). In addition, each installation 
conducts an internal review at the 2-year midpoint 
between the AMC I&SA reviews. 

Staff personnel conducted sixteen ECAS reviews 
in FY94. Formal, draft reports generated as a result 
of each of the reviews outlined environmental 


Blue Grass AD 

Charles Melvin Price Support Center 

Crane AAP 

Ethan Allen Firing Range 

Hawthorne AAP 

Holston AAP 

Lake City AAP 

Lonestar AAP 

Longhom AAP 

Mississippi AAP 

Redstone Arsenal 

Riverbank AAP 

Seneca AD 

Stratford Army Engine Plant 

Twin Cities AAP 

Vint Hill Farms Station 

ECAS Review Date 

25-29 October 1993 
13-17 June 1994 
1-5 August 1994 
29 August-2 September 1994 
22-26 August 1994 
19-23 September 1994 
15-19 November 1993 
28 February-4 March 1994 
31 January-4 February 1994 
10- 14 January 1994 
6-10 December 1993 
1- 5 November 1993 
11-15 April 1994 
11-15 July 1994 
23-27 May 1994 
2-6 May 1994 


Resource Management AMCEN 

deficiencies and recommendations for corrective actions. Installations were required to respond to the findings 
with the status and milestones for all corrective actions. Following incorporation of acceptable proposed 
corrective actions, AMC I&SA produces a final report for each installation. The AMC I&S A reviewed the listed 
AMC installations during FY94. 

The AMC I&SA received documentation confirming performance of an internal, two-year review from eight 
additional installations. 

The AMC I&SA continued the program of providing environmental Special Assistance Visits (SAVs) 
throughout FY94. Staff personnel conducted six SAVs assisting AMC installations in the areas of asbestos 
management, waste water treatment, water system management, storm water management, and tenant program 
assessments. Personnel also provided input at various policy and user group meetings, and assisted at 
AMCEN-A with Environmental Documentation (National Environmental Policy Act), program management and 
natural resources program liaison. 

The third annual AMC Environmental Lessons Learned Workshop was held 15-19 August 1994 in 
Bettendorf, LA. The workshop had over 240 participants, including many presenters from AMC installations. 
The presentations described individual problems encountered and shared the solutions, which were sometimes 
innovative, with other participants. Attendees included COL F. R. Finch, Army Director of Environmental 
Programs, and COL M. W. Potter, HQ AMC DCSEN. 

The AMC I&SA also awarded a multimedia Environmental Services Contract late in June through the local 
Rock Island Arsenal (RIA) Procurement Office. The contract was awarded to PRC Environmental Management, 
Inc., a national, full service, environmental consulting firm. The services immediately became available to AMC 
installations on a delivery order basis for both large and small environmental requirements including studies, 
assessments, permit applications, surveys, plans, and reports. Several staff members participated in development 
of the solicitation, formation of the source selection plan, evaluation of the proposals, and the final award. The 
AMC I&SA will continue to provide support for scopes of work, cost estimates, reviews of deliverables, and 
administrative coordination of the contract. 

The AMC I&SA continued its development of the Hazardous and Toxic Substance Control Module 
(HTSCM), a computerized tracking system for hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. Staff personnel 
designed the very flexible, user-friendly, modular system for individual AMC installations to use as required. 
A contractor was later employed for assistance in the actual program development, with the first system 
eventually fielded at RIA late in the year. The HTSCM was demonstrated for AMC personnel at the 
Environmental Lessons Learned Workshop in August. Future deployment of additional systems at AMC sites 
is planned. 

Natural Resources Program Reviews (NRPRs) 

A total Of fourteen NRPRs were conducted Aberdeen Proving Ground Fort Monmouth 

, . __-^.. __ . , __ Kansas AAP Letterkenny AD 

during FY94. These reviews were not rated. They NeW portAAP Picatinny Arsenal 

were conducted at the following installations in Pine Bluff Arsenal Redstone Arsenal Support Activity 

accordance with AR 420-70 to assist installations in JSEI^AAP ?£Jh£Ea ad 

maintaining effective natural resources programs in U.S. Army Research Laboratory White Sands Missile Range 
compliance with Army / Department of Defense Regulations and Federal and state laws: 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Natural Resources Management 

In addition to the 1 4 NRPRs conducted during FY94, AMC I&SA performed 21 special visits and reviewed 
21 Natural Resources Management Plans. 

The Legacy Resources Management Program has Agricultural / Grazing $ l ,600,000 

. . i • ° c • Forestry 1,200,000 

become an increasingly important means of assuring j^y resources Management Program i ,579,000 

that Conservation Pillar projects are funded on AMC Integrated Training Area Management 2.579.000 

installations. In order to facilitate Legacy resources Total $6,958,ooo 

better, AMC I&SA obtained assistance through the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education and now have 
an individual dedicated to the Legacy program. As program manager for AMC Conservation Pillar Budgets, 
AMC I&SA accomplished distribution of funds by account as listed. 

Air Quality 

Throughout AMC, the Air Quality Program continued to work without major problems and was mostly 
controlled by State Implementation Plans individually administered by State or Local authorities. As with the 
remainder of the air pollution control community (both regulators and the regulated), AMC awaited the final 
enactment of regulations implementing the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA). There were no 
significant air pollution source problems in 1994. 

AMC as well as the Army is now implementing the provisions of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (CAAA- 
90). This is being done in collaboration with the other military services, through active participation in the DOD 
Services Steering Committee on CAA Implementation. 

The CAAA-90 require installations to perform an extensive inventory of all air pollution sources by 1994 
and submit operating permit application by 1995. Most AMC installations have completed the emission 
inventories and are currently in the process of preparing the operating permit applications. The Army 
Environmental Center (AEC) funded approximately $10 million and hired three contractors to inventory all major 
Army as well as AMC Facilities. Some Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated facilities were resistant to 
outside contractors inventorying their facilities and performed the emission inventories in-house. It should be 
noted that CAA requires annual recertification of emission inventories which is being identified in the 
Environmental Planning, Programming, and Budgeting Report (1383s). 

The CAA Operating Permit Program will impose significant new constraints on operational flexibility. The 
CAA operating permits are expensive and funding is an issue. According to an AEC estimate, it may cost major 
installations up to $200,000 to prepare and submit a CAA permit application. The AEC and the AMC 
Installations & and Services Activity have developed a Permit Assistance Program to assist the installations in 
preparing for CAA permit requirements and the Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine will 
provide a QA / QC service to the installations. 

Compliance with the CAA Section 176 (c), General Conformity, has increased reporting and documentation 
requirements. The Environmental Quality Division, AMC, has already issued a policy on who needs to comply 
with the Conformity Rule and AMC specific procedures on how to do it. The DA will publish their guidance 
shortly. The DA draft did not conflict with the AMC existing policy. 


Resource Management AMCEN 

The Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) rules implementation is an ongoing effort. Many of the 174 rules to 
be issued by the Environmental Protection Agency before the year 2000 regulating hazardous air emissions will 
require costly emissions controls and will constrain operational flexibility. The HAPs rules will impact Vapor 
Degreasing, Application of Aerospace Coatings, and other AMC Maintenance and Manufacturing activities. 

The CAAA-90 programs are typically delegated to States for implementation. Because the AMC is 
represented in most States, providing guidance is a particular problem as State programs vary widely. 

Storm Water Management 

AMC installations applied for storm water discharge permits along with developing and implementing Storm 
Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWP3). The U.S. Geological Survey provided SWP3 implementation training 
to AMC personnel. 

Chesapeake Bay Program 

On 14 July 1994 over 20 federal agencies and departments signed the "Agreement of Federal Agencies on 
Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay" which included six specific commitments in the area of nutrient 
reductions. DOD has been given the lead to complete upgrades of waste water treatment plants (WWTP) to 
reduce nutrients by 40 percent, with priority on facilities in excess of 0.5 million gallons per day being upgraded 
by FY2000. Aberdeen Proving Ground has requested, through RCS1383, funds to upgrade their WWTP to 
reduce nitrogen to meet the 40 percent reduction goal. 

Radon Reduction Program (RRP) 

The Army established the RRP on 21 March 1988 with the publication of HQDA Letter 40-88-3. The 
program required that buildings owned and leased by the Army be tested for radon and that remedial action be 
taken for indoor radon levels higher than 4 picocuries per liter of air. Testing would be done via Alpha Track 
Monitors (ATM). Priority for testing was assigned as follows: Priority 1 (PI) structures included day care 
centers, hospitals, schools, and living areas, (i.e., quarters and billets); Priority 2 (P2) structures included areas 
having 24-hour living areas (e.g., operations centers and research, development, test and evaluation facilities); 
Priority 3 (P3) structures were all other routinely occupied structures (e.g., offices and shops). AMC has 
completed testing its buildings, and complete mitigation efforts are expected by FY97. 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

The NEPA requires environmental considerations of an action before making a decision. The considerations 
are normally documented in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Environmental Assessment (EA), or a 
Record of Environmental consideration (REC). Most of the NEPA documentation is prepared to support Base 
Realignment and Closure (BRAC); other actions requiring NEPA documentation included real estate, master 
planning, construction and materiel operations developments. Follow up studies / clean up actions due to BRAC 
were required per the RCRA and CERCLA. 

BRAC. Data gathering for BRAC 95 was initiated in May, continued through the summer, and ended in 
September. The DASD for Environmental Security initiated a FAST TRACK Cleanup program. BRAC Cleanup 
Teams (BCT) made up of a BRAC Environmental Coordinator (BEC), EPA coordinator, and a State 


Resource Management 


representative were instituted under this new program. In addition, BRAC Transition Coordinators were 
established to coordinate with the local organizations and DOD. Tobyhanna AD and Lexington were the first 
to go through the new FAST TRACK Cleanup for leasing. 

Non-BRAC. An EIS was initiated for White Sands Missile Range. Aberdeen Proving Ground was in the 
preliminary stages of requesting to prepare an EIS for new operations at the installation. The Army Acquisition 
and Pollution Prevention Support Office (AAPPSO) developed an EA for the modification of the Ml A2 tank. 
The EA looked at pollution prevention at several AMC installations. DODIG did a report that criticized the DOD 
services on complying with NEPA in the Materiel Acquisition Process. 

Environmental Restoration Program 

AMC demonstrated initiative and leadership in remediating contamination from past activities at our 
installations. Army's FY94 Installation Restoration Program spent $538 millions to remediate contamination at 
Army installations in CONUS, Hawaii, and Alaska. Approximately $450 million was spent on AMC 

Section 105(e) of CERCLA requires that the 
EPA maintain a national inventory of hazardous 
waste sites, the National Priorities List (NPL). Thirty 
AMC installations are on the NPL. 

Section 120(e) of the 1986 Superfund 
Amendments Reauthorization Act (SARA) requires 
development of Interagency Agreements (IAGs) 
between federal facilities and the EPA. IAGs detail 
the technical and legal procedures by which remedial 
action will be conducted at federal facilities listed on 
the NPL. 

Aberdeen PG 
Anniston AD 
Comhusker AAP 
Iowa AAP 
Lake City AAP 
Letterkenny AD 
Longhom AAP 
Michaelsville Landfill 
Natick RDEC 
Picatinny Arsenal 
Riverbank AAP 
Sacramento AD 
Seneca AD 
Tobyhanna AD 
Twin Cities AAP 

Alabama AAP 


Edgewood Area 

Joliet AAP 

LAP Area Manufacturing Area 

Lone Star AAP 

Louisiana AAP 

Milan AAP 


Redstone Arsenal 

Rocky Mountain Arsenal 

Savanna AD 

Southeast Area 

Tooele AD 

Umatilla ADA 

During FY94, $450 million in Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) Funds 
and $82 millions Base Realignment and Closure 
(BRAC) funds were used in remediation at the 
following AMC installations: 

To date the status of AMC's environmental 
restoration program is as follows: 73 AMC 
installations and annexes with IRP activities; 2650 
sites (Restoration Management Information System 
[RMIS] sites) identified for restoration; Preliminary 
Assessment / Site Investigation (PA / SI) completed 
on 1 600 sites; 1 38 sites have been cleaned-up via 
removal action / interim remedial action / interim 
remedial measures; 237 with REM / IRA / RA 

Aberdeen PG 

Anniston AD 

Blossom Point FTA 

Dugway PG 

Hawthorne AAP 

Iowa AAP 

Joliet AAP 

Letterkenny AD 

Longhom AAP 

Materials Tech Lab (BRAC) 

Nike APG (BRAC) 

Pueblo AD (BRAC) 

Ravenna AAP 

Red River AD 

Riverbank AAP 

Rocky Mountain Arsenal 

Seneca AD 

Twin Cities AAP 

Volunteer AAP 

Woodbridge RF (BRAC) 

Alabama AAP (BRAC) 
Badger AAP 
Comhusker AAP 
Fort Wingate AD (BRAC) 
Indiana AAP 
Jefferson PG (BRAC) 
Lake City AAP 
Lone Star AAP 
Louisiana AAP 
Milan AAP 
Picatinny Arsenal 
Radford AAP 
Ravenna AAP 
Redstone Arsenal 
Rock Island Arsenal 
Savanna ADA 
Tobyhanna AD 
Umatilla AD (BRAC) 
Watervliet Arsenal 


Resource Management AMCEN 

underway; 36 Proposed Remedial Action Plan completed; 30 Record of Decisions (RODs) signed; 43 IRP 
Installation Action Plans (LAP) completed. 

An Army IRP Process Action Team was established to enhance project execution and to bolster the progress 
of IRP activities to the remedial action phase. AMCEN-A is a member to the DA LRP PAT. 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

The major impact of the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) on AMC activities was in the regulation of 
operations concerned with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs). Efforts centered on compliance with storage, 
handling, disposal regulations, and cleanup and reporting of PCB spills. While not regulated as hazardous waste, 
these materials were included as an area of interest in the ongoing environmental audit program. 

Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program 

The Federal Regulations on Underground Storage 
Tank System (40 CFR 280), as promulgated by EPA 
in 1988 requires all AMC installations to comply 
with the requirements relating to leak detection (LD), 
corrosion protection (CP), and spill / overfill 
prevention (SOP) in accordance with the following 

AMC installations have consistently identified 
and requested funding for various UST studies and corrective projects to comply with these deadlines. In FY94, 
the UST funding requirements were $22.2 million, of which $3.5 million worth of projects are Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) eligible, while $19.67 million are Environmental Compliance 
Achievement Program (ECAP) projects. 

AMC HQ is an active member of the DA UST Working Group. This working group meets once every quarter 
to develop guidelines and strategies for complying with UST regulations. The proponent of this working group 
is the DA Environmental Office. Through the effort of this UST Working Group, a UST data base, known as 
TANKMAN, was developed. The U.S. Army Environmental Center has fielded the TANKMAN for voluntary 
use of AMC installations. Four individuals from AMC installations has been nominated to the TANKMAN 
Users Group to represent AMC. The TANKMAN will enhance installation's compliance with regulatory 
requirements as well as AR 200-1 mandate to prepare an annual inventory and management plan. 

Hazardous Waste Minimization / Pollution Prevention. 

There have been several major influences on AMC's Hazardous Waste Minimization / Pollution Prevention 
(HAZMIN / PP) Programs. 

The most critical issue impacting the HAZMIN / PP Program was the loss of funding from the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account (DERA). In previous years, AMC obligated approximately $4 million per 
year in support of very productive installation level HAZMIN / PP projects. AMC's progress has been slowed 


Tank / Piping 




New Tanks 

at installation 

at installation 

at installation 

Existing Tanks installed: 

♦Before 1965 

22 Dec 1989 


22 Dec 1990 


22 Dec 1991 

22 Dec 1998 

22 Dec 1998 


22 Dec 1992 


22 Dec 1993 

Existing Piping: 


22 Dec 1990 

22 Dec 1998 

does not applv 


same as 

existing tanks 

22 Dec 1998 

does not apply 

Resource Management AMCEN 

by this shortage of funds. Some installations have decided to continue funding these types of projects "out-of- 
hide" due to the positive return on investment. 

A secondary factor influencing the HAZMIN / PP Program is that the requirement, under AR 200- 1 , for 
HAZMIN Program expired as of the end of calendar year 1992. Headquarters AMC continued to push an 
aggressive HAZMIN / PP Program because it makes good business sense. 

The previous factors have had a negative impact on this aspect of the program. However, on 3 August 1993, 
President Clinton signed Executive Order (EO) 12856, entitled "Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws 
and Pollution Prevention Requirements." This EO has given HAZMIN / PP a new level of interest and support 
at both DOD and DA staff levels. 

Under this EO, President Clinton has asked each Department to adopt a voluntary 50 percent reduction in 
toxic emissions over a five year period starting in 1994. Currently, AMCEN is interpreting this to be a reduction 
in emissions reported under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. 

The last Headquarters AMC HAZMIN / PP Plan was published in April 1993, four months prior to EO 
12856. The AMC plan established calendar year 1993 the baseline. The command's overall goal was to reduce 
the amount of hazardous waste generated by 25 percent from 1993 to 1997. To date there have been significant 
problems establishing the baseline hazardous waste generations; there are problems with the Army Compliance 
Tracking System (ACTS) which inexplicably appears to "lose" data from the files. This issue is being 
coordinated / resolved among this headquarters and other concerned parties. 

HQAMC is working with other service industrial commands and the DOD staff to ensure smooth 
implementation of EO 1 2856 among the services. 

The Executive Order did not provide authorization for funding for its various requirements. AMC is working 
with DA to establish funding levels and criteria for compliance with this EO. 

Army Compliance Tracking System (ACTS) 

The ACTS has now been in existence since mid-November 1992 with the first quarterly report submitted in 
January 1993. Since its inception, ACTS has had one upgrade, with Version 1.2 being fielded in October 1994. 
ACTS is a DA and DOD reporting requirement which provides compliance status, fines and penalties, staffing 
information, cultural resources, treatment, storage and disposal authorized facilities, hazardous waste generation 
information, to name a few, by state and installation. This system is intended to reduce the response time for 
higher headquarters to out-of-cycle queries and reports. 

There are approximately 27 tables in ACTS, covering each of the major environmental laws and program 
areas. Inspections, Enforcement Actions, and Fines are due on a quarterly basis, with Hazardous Waste 
Generation information due on a CY basis, and all other tables (permits, staffing, etc.) due on a FY basis. The 
Noise table was deleted in FY94 and a spill reporting table will be added in FY95. It is anticipated that as this 
system grows and improves, it will eventually decrease the reporting burden on installations. 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Environmental Compliance Program Execution 

The Federal Facility Compliance Act of October 1992 (FFCA) had a major impact on the command's 
environmental status in FY93 and FY94. The FFCA effectively waives sovereign immunity for federal 
government activities under some provisions of RCRA. Specifically, the FFCA affects RCRA Subtitle C, 
pertaining to hazardous waste. In FY93, AMC received 6 fines, assessed $204,422, proposed $923,199 and paid 
$5,000 for RCRA violations. In FY94, AMC received 1 1 fines, assessed $427,656, proposed $331,160 and paid 
$1 16,204 for CERCLA, CWA, CAA, and RCRA violations. One resolved fine included a Special Environmental 
Project (SEP), which deferred $63,2 1 8 of the potential fine of $ 1 38,922. Most of the fines were for hazardous 
waste (HW) violations, including labeling, rags found in operational areas, storage over 90 days, unauthorized 
disposal, etc. Some states have assessed fines citing the CWA, CAA, and CERCLA, but AMC has been 
successful in having most of these rescinded, citing sovereign immunity. 

At the end of FY93, AMC had 43 noncomplying installations (110 sources) composed of 12 air 
noncomplying sources, 34 waste water noncomplying sources, 41 hazardous waste sources, 6 drinking water, 2 
toxic substances, 5 underground storage tanks, 9 spills, and 1 solid waste source. At the close of FY94, the 
number of noncomplying installations remained at 43. Due to the CAA Amendments and the FFCA, the number 
of noncomplying sources increased to 133, broken down as: 14 air, 34 waste water, 58 hazardous waste, 8 
drinking water, 3 toxic substances, 5 underground storage tank, 9 spills and 2 solid waste problem areas. 

Army Environmental Requirements Report 

The Army Environmental Requirements Report (RCS D-P&L(SA) 1383), a multi year environmental master 
plan, summarizes pollution control actions and solutions consistent with all applicable standards. The RCS- 1383 
provides data to HQDA to inform the EPA of Army actions to comply with environmental laws. It is used for 
budget planning purposes. 

Environmental Training 

The Army has a very comprehensive and up-to-date environmental training program for Installation 
Engineers and Acquisition Program Managers as offered by AMC's Army Logistics Management College 
(ALMC). The eight environmental offerings include: Basic Environmental Coordinator's Course (10 days); 
NEPA Implementation Course (5 days); Manager's Environmental Course (4 days resident, on-site and satellite); 
Defense Hazardous Waste Course-refresher (1 day on-site); Defense Hazardous Materials / Waste Handling 
Course (5 days in resident, on-site, satellite, correspondence and accredited off-campus instruction modes); 
Environmental Coordinators Seminar (4 days resident and on-site via satellite, correspondence, resident and on- 
site), Executive Environmental and Hazardous Material Course (3'/2 days resident, on-site, and Satellite Education 
Program); Pollution Prevention in the Acquisition Process (5 days resident). 


Acquisition of Privately Owned Property for Environmental Remediation Purposes 

The United States acquired fee title to approximately 460 acres in California, and has Congressional approval 
for the acquisition of an additional 2 1 acres in Virginia, at a total cost of over $7M for environmental remediation 
purposes. Both acquisitions were necessary because of leakage or disposal of materials stored on Army / Defense 


Resource Management 


depots. The contaminants polluted groundwater plumes which migrated onto private properties adjacent to the 
depots. AMC is likely to see more acquisitions of this nature in the future due to acceptable disposal standards 
during the WWII era, which have now proved to be harmful to the environment. 

Interim Leasing. Sacramento Army Depot (SAAD) 

The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations and Housing) approved a blanket Report of 
Availability (ROA) for interim leasing at SAAD. To expedite the leasing process, delegation of authority to 
approve leases was granted to the Commander, U.S. Army Engineer District, Sacramento. The SAAD 
Commander was given the authority to approve usage of facilities that have no significant effect on the human 
environment and require only a Record of Environmental Consideration. HQ AMC approves usage requiring 
an Environmental Assessment. This delegation will expedite the reuse of SAAD until final disposal takes place. 
The District is executing outgrants and discussing with the City of Sacramento the reuse and disposal of SAAD. 
This is the first blanket ROA issued by the Army and will be used as a model for other DA BRAC installations. 
A team from SAAD, DESCOM and HQ AMC developed the concept. 

Distribution of Proceeds Generated by AMC Installations 

HQ AMC distributed all FY93 revenues generated by AMC installations through the leasing or sale of real 
and personal property. The Corps of Engineer districts deposited $1,545,055 into Special Treasury Accounts. 
The funds were distributed to the AMC Major Subordinate Commands for redistribution to installations that 
generated the proceeds. Installations are allowed to use these funds for maintenance, repair and environmental 
restoration projects. Some installations are receiving more funds than they actually generated, while others are 
receiving less than the amount they are entitled to receive. AMCEN-R is working with DA and the Corps of 
Engineers to resolve this problem. 

Real Property Inventory (RPI) 

The automated Army Inventory of Military Real 
Property master data file, containing data from 1 05 
installations, sub-installations, and Defense Logistics 
Agency sites, was updated quarterly and reported to 
HQDA. The master file incorporated Unit 
Identification Codes (UICs) required for Army 
stationing and used in the Army Stationing and 
Installation Plan (ASIP). Assistance was provided to 
the installations in the creation of assignment records 
with UICs. Fifty-eight installations submitted 
automated updates using Integrated Facilities 
System-Mini / Micro (IFS-M) or Desktop Resource 
for Real Property Management (DR REAL). Site assistance visits were conducted at four IFS-M installations. 
Personnel reviewed and commented on draft revision of AR 405-45. 

Million Square Feet (MSF) of Facilities Space 

AMC Total: 
283.1 MSF 

Active AMC: 
180.6 MSF 

Active: 148.5 MSF 

To be excessed: 30.0 MSF 

BRAC Disposal: 2.1 MSF 

DLA Managed: 
48.0 MSF 

Active: 41.1 MSF 

BRAC Disposal: 6.9 MSF 

23.4 MSF 

Active: 148.5 MSF 

BRAC Disposal: 4.3 MSF 

31.1 MSF 

Active: 14.9 MSF 

BRAC Disposal: 16.2 MSF 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Real Property Inventory Reduction 

Resource constraints have forced commanders to review facility use and eliminate maintenance and repair 
on inactive facilities to the maximum extent possible. AMC has made a tremendous effort to reduce the active 
inventory as shown below. 


Command Supply Management Review (CSMR) 

The CSMR is an Army directed program to provide technical assistance to the visited installation / activity 
and provide a professional evaluation of the installation stock record account and property book operations. 
These reviews are to be conducted once every two years by the Major Army Command (MACOM). The US AMC 
Installations and Services Activity (AMC I&SA) is resourced to conduct them on a 5-year cycle. The CSMRs 
were rated as satisfactory or unsatisfactory until the fourth quarter of FY94 when assignment of ratings was 

The AMC I&SA Conducted 1 5 CSMRs in FY94. 523d MP Company 74th Maintenance (RASA) 

„ „ . i . j .i •. AMC-Europe Anniston Army Depot (AD) 

Follow-up reviews were conducted at three Sites ARL-Aberdeen PG ARL-White Sands Missile 

previously rated as unsatisfactory. These Sites Aviation Tech Test Center CECOM Communications Security 

included the Program Manager-Roeky Mountain <Jlrt . lfchtlMc , Ma K££SJ£S&» 

Arsenal, U.S. Army Simulation, Training, and PuebloADA Savanna Army Depot Activity (ADA) 

Instrumentation Command (STRICOM), and U.S. ^ llaADA USA Missile Command (MICOM) / 

Army Research Laboratory (ARL)-Adelphi. Of the usa Tank-Automotive Cmd 

three revisited sites, one received a satisfactory rating, 

one an unsatisfactory rating, and one was reviewed in the fourth quarter; therefore, it did not receive a rating. The 

AMC I&SA conducted CSMRs at the listed sites in FY94. The CMPSC was rated unsatisfactory and a follow-up 

review is scheduled in the first quarter of FY95. 

Food Service Program Management Reviews (FSPMRs) 

The FSPMR is an Army directed program to Aberdeen Proving Ground NatickRD&E Center 

. , . . . . , . . , Redstone Arsenal Support Activity (RASA) Sierra Army Depot 

provide technical assistance to the Visited U.S. Army Garrison Fort Monmouth Vint Hill Farms Station 

installations. These reviews are to be conducted once white Sands Missile Range 

each year by the MACOM. The FSPMRs are not rated. The AMC I&SA conducted seven FSPMRs in FY94 

at the listed installations. 

Command Equipment Management Program Review (CEMPR) 

AMC installation Equipment Managers are responsible for managing nonexpendable equipment worth over 
$6 billion. Unit Equipment Management Programs (EMP) are reviewed on a 4-year cycle in accordance with 
existing guidance and are completed in conjunction with Equipment Survey Program (ESP) reviews. These 
reviews focus on the life cycle management of installation equipment to include authorization, acquisition, 
elements of accountability, maintenance, utilization, and disposal. Emphasis is placed on use of sound business 
and engineering principles and on providing technical assistance. Reviews were rated satisfactory / unsatisfactory 
until the fourth quarter when assignment of ratings was discontinued. 


Resource Management 


Aberdeen PG 
ARL Aberdeen 
Cold Regions Test Center 
Corpus Christi AD 
Div / Army Band 
Joliet AAP 
Sierra AD 
TMDE Support Center CCAD 
TMDE Support Center- 
Jefferson PG 
TMDE Support Center-Warren 
Vint Hill Farms 

The AMC I&SA conducted 25 CEMPRs during 
FY94. Follow-up reviews were conducted at four 
sites previously rated unsatisfactory. These sites 
included the U.S. Army Garrison Fort Monmouth, 
U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command 
(CECOM), the U.S. Army Aviation and Troop 
Command (ATCOM) Installation Support Activity 
and the PM-Rocky Mountain Arsenal. All were 
found to be satisfactory. The CEMPRs were 
conducted at the listed sites. Sierra AD was rated 
unsatisfactory, but is in the process of correcting identified problems. 

In response to USAAA Report No. NR 94-454, Defense Business Operations Fund (DBOF), Depot 
Maintenance, Army FY92 Financial Statements (AMC No. A9202), CEMPR procedures were modified to 
incorporate review of entries in the Installation Equipment Management System to ensure DBOF units are 
properly coding and entering applicable costs for capital equipment. 

Anniston Army Depot (AD) 


Combat Systems Testing Activity 

Detroit Army Tank Plant 

Jefferson Proving Ground (PG) 

Lake City Army Ammunition Plant (AAP) 

Selfridge Support Activity 



TMDE Support Center-Anniston AD 

TMDE Support Center — Tobyhanna AD 

Tobyhanna AD 

Administrative Transport Management Survey (ATMS) 

Regulatory guidance provides for review of installation transport management functions every 18 months. 
The AMC I&SA is resourced to complete them on a 3-year cycle, except for Army ammunition plants which are 
reviewed on a 4-year cycle in conjunction with scheduled CEMPRs and ESPs. The purpose of the ATMS is to 
evaluate the management of installation mobile equipment operations and provide recommendations concerning 
the proper equipment mix. 

The AMC I&SA conducted 15 ATMSs during 
FY 94. Follow-up reviews were conducted at three 
sites. These sites included ARL-Aberdeen PG, Vint 
Hill Farms Station, and the PM-Rocky Mountain 
Arsenal. All were found to be satisfactory. The 
ATMSs were conducted at the listed sites. Vint Hill 
Farms Station and Iowa AAP were rated 
unsatisfactory. As noted above, a follow-up ATMS 
at Vint Hill Farms Station found all major problems 
corrected. A follow-up is scheduled for Iowa AAP in 

Aberdeen PG 

ARL Aberdeen 


Combat Sys Test Act 

Detroit ATP 

Jefferson PG 

Lake City AAP 

Selfridge SA 



TMDE Support Center-CCAD 

TMDE Support Center -TOAD 

Tobyhanna AD Vint Hill Farms 

Anniston AD 


Cold Region Test Center 

Corpus Christi AD 

Fort Monmouth 

Joliet AAP 


Sierra AD 


TMDE Support Center-ANAD 

TMDE Support Center- JPG 

TMDE Support Center- Warren 

Equipment Survey Program (ESP) 

The objective of the ESP is to ensure each AMC unit's equipment authorizations are in line with mission 
requirements. Surveyors are empowered to authorize many Table of Distribution and Allowance (TDA) section 
m changes on site. The ESP output includes a document to be used for updating the unit's TDA during the next 
TDA management of change window. Regulatory guidance provides for a four-year cycle. Units with assets 
worth $1M or more receive an on-site review. Others (21 units) receive a desk audit of authorized allowances. 


Resource Management 


The AMC I&SA performed 26 ESPs and two 
desk audits during FY94. These reviews resulted in 
TDA equipment deletions worth $114.3M and 
provided $49M worth of excess equipment available 
for redistribution within the AMC community. The 
ESP provides AMC a return on investment of 
approximately 2000/ 1. The AMC I&SA performed 
desk audits at U.S. Army Depot System Command 
(DESCOM) Support Activity-Far East and U.S. 
Army Petroleum Center. The ESP sites in FY94 are 

Aberdeen PG 

ARL Aberdeen 


Combat Sys Test Act 

Detroit ATP 

Jefferson PG 

Lake City AAP 

Selfridge SA 



TMDE Support Center-CCAD 

TMDE Support Center-TOAD 

Tobyhanna AD 

Anniston AD 


Cold Region Test Center 

Corpus Christi AD 

Fort Monmouth 

Joliet AAP 


Sierra AD 


TMDE Support Center-ANAD 

TMDE Support Center- JPG 

TMDE Support Center- Warren 

Vint Hill Farms 

Technical Assistance Visits 

Supply-related programs. Sixteen customer funded technical assistance visits were conducted during 
FY94. Three assistance visits provided supply-related guidance in both installation stock record accounting 
procedures and property book operations; four visits focused on supply support responsibilities, one focused on 
the automated AMC Installation Supply System (AMCISS), seven visits focused on property book accountability, 
and one subsequently provided guidance in food service management. 

Equipment Management. Four customer funded technical assistance visits were conducted during FY94 
to provide guidance concerning corrective actions needed to ensure establishment of a viable installation EMP. 
Sites visited included TACOM, U.S. Army Security Assistance Command, Tobyhanna AD, and the Chemical 
Demilitarization Facility- Johnston Island. 

Excess Property Management 

War on Excess Report In a 2 August 1991 message, the Army's Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics called 
for renewed commitment to "our greatest supply discipline challenge - winning the war on excess." The 
declaration brought focus to the Army's longstanding struggle to identify, recover, report, and redistribute excess 
materiel. The message also established a reporting requirement to track each MACOM's progress. 

A subsequent message was dispatched to clarify the reporting requirement. That message placed emphasis 
on repair parts (class 9) and called for quarterly reports limited to the value of excess class 9 materiel. Because 
some automated supply systems, including AMCISS, did not isolate class 9 excess, the Department of the Army 
(DA) requested that AMCEN report the value of excess items bearing specified Materiel Category codes. 

The initial report of data from AMC installations (second quarter of FY92) reflected a $78.2 million total. 
Excess values increased during the next three successive quarters. The gain was caused by reductions in stockage 
levels and increased turn-ins related to downsizing. A decline in excess value began in the second quarter of 

The AMC installations have made remarkable progress in the War on Excess. Since the first quarter of 
FY93, when the highest value of excess was reported, AMC has reported lower excess values for the past six 
successive quarters. For the third quarter of FY94 AMC reported a total value of $31.7 million. The US AMC 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Systems Integration and Management Activity (SIMA) developed a program for AMCISS which provides the 
capability to extract a special report that depicts the exact value of class 9 in excess. 

AMC Excess Installation Equipment Redistribution. The AMC I&SA, responsible for screening excess 
AMC installation equipment, redistributed just over $10M worth of excess in FY93. During FY94, $19.3M 
worth of AMC installation equipment was redistributed. This represents a cost avoidance to the receiving unit 
equal to, or greater than, the value of the redistributed items. Recipients are only required to pay for packaging 
and shipping. 

Su pply and Maintenance Excellence Awards 

Chief of Staff Army, Supply Excellence Award (SEA). The SEA is an annual award co-sponsored by the 
American Defense Preparedness Association (ADPA) and the Army, and is administered by U.S. Army 
Quartermaster Center and School (USAQMC&S). The AMC nominees are submitted by the major subordinate 
commands and direct reporting activities. AMC evaluates submissions and recommend to the AMC Commander 
those installations that should be nominated for Army-wide competition. Plaques were presented to AMC 
winners and runners-up. The AMC organizations nominated to compete in the FY94 Army-wide SEA were: 

Modification Table of Organization and Equipment (MTOE) Winners: 

Company level: U.S. Army 523d Military Police Company, Aberdeen PG, MD. 
Battalion level: U.S. Army 74th Maintenance Battalion (TMDE), Redstone Arsenal, AL. 

Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) Winners: 

Tenant level: U.S. Army TMDE Activity, Redstone Arsenal, AL. 
TDA-Installation level: Red River Army Depot (RRAD), Texarkana, TX. 

The RRAD was selected by USAQMC&S as runner-up in the Army-wide TDA-Installation level 
competition. Plaques provided by ADPA and USAQMC&S were presented by the Chief of Staff, Army and the 
USAQMC&S Commandant, respectively, during an award ceremony at the Pentagon in September 1994. 

Army Award for Maintenance Excellence (AAME). The AAME is an annual award sponsored by HQDA 
DCSLOG to recognize excellence in accomplishment of equipment maintenance up to, but not including, the 
depot level. The U.S. Army Ordnance Center and School is their executive agent. Submissions are due in mid- 
November each year, consequently, the FY93 winners are actually selected in FY94. Although participation by 
AMC unit installation equipment maintenance elements is encouraged, in recent years very few units have elected 
to prepare the necessary documentation. This is certainly attributable to the resource reductions experienced over 
the past two years and to the loss of personnel capable of developing the award documentation packages. The 
AMC I&SA selects AMC winners in each category during December and forwards the winning packages to 
HQDA for Army-wide competition. AMC winners receive a plaque and a congratulatory letter the AMC Chief 
of Staff. Categories for FY93 included TDA and MTOE units defined as light (50-700 items maintained), 
intermediate (701-1000 items), and heavy (over 1000 items). The FY93 AMC results for each category were: 

Light Density (TDA): Winner: Cold Regions Test Center; 

Runner- Up: U.S. Army Electronic PG. 
Light Density (MTOE) Winner 95th Maintenance Company (TMDE); 

Runner-Up: No Selection. 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Intermediate Density (TDA) No Selection. 

Intermediate Density (MTOE) Winner: 2nd Maintenance Company (TMDE), Redstone Arsenal 

Runner-Up: No Selection. 
Heavy Density (TDA) Winner Tobyhanna AD 

Runner-Up: Tooele AD. 
Heavy Density (MTOE) No Qualifying Units. 

No AMC units were selected during DA level competition. 

Philip A. Connelly Award Program for Excellence in Army Food Service 

The program is an annual award co-sponsored by the International Food Service Executive Association and 
the Army and is administered by USAQMC&S. AMCEN visited all AMC troop dining facilities in January 1994 
and evaluated them for competition in the Army-wide program. The AMC Commander received our 
recommendations on those installations that should be nominated for Army competition. 

The AMC awards were presented to winners of the AMC competition. The Consolidated Dining Facility at 
Redstone Arsenal was nominated for Army competition in the large dining facility category and the Consolidated 
Dining Facility at White Sands Missile Range was nominated for the small dining facility category. 

The AMC awards were presented to runners-up of the AMC competition. The U.S. Army Aberdeen Proving 
Ground Support Activity (APGSA) was runner-up in the large dining facility category and the Consolidated 
Dining Facility at Sierra Army Depot was runner-up in the small dining facility category. 

The AMC winners participated in the DA world-wide competition during March- April 1994. The AMC did 
not have an Army winner or runner-up this year. 

Single Stock Fund (SSF) 

The Single Stock Fund (SSF) program is an Army effort to consolidate wholesale and retail stocks under one 
ownership and relational data base. The inventory will be controlled by the wholesale item manager while receipt, 
storage, and issue will be performed by installation personnel. 

The U.S. Army Strategic Logistics Agency is the PM for the SSF program for DA. The Army assigned 
responsibility for implementation of policies and procedures for item management, budgeting, requirements 
determination, distribution, stock control, and excess management to HQ AMC. The AMC I&SA's 
responsibilities include modifying AMCISS to serve as the user level relational program for SSF and identifying 
and implementing modified policies and procedures for user level requisitioning, system testing, and validation 
of conversion data. 

Six trips were made this year to the following installations to support the SSF program - Fort Hood, TX; HQ 


Resource Management AMCEN 

Automated Systems Management 

AMC Installation Supply System (AMCISS). The AMCISS is the AMC standard automated stock record 
accounting system for stock control and accounting for materiel acquired for installation operations. The 
AMCISS is an integrated system that interfaces with AMC standard financial accounting systems and the 
Standard Army Automated Contracting System. It is operational at 29 AMC installations. Funding was 
requested from higher headquarters to implement at AMC installations that do not operate the system. A 
modified AMCISS and the Standard Depot System are used in the proof of principle of the SSF program. The 
AMCISS was fielded to APGSA in FY94. There was only one visit to this installation in FY94. 

AMC Installation Equipment Management System (IEMS). The IEMS, developed by SIMA-East, is 
in use at 60 AMC sites. The system automates the principal equipment management functions to include 
authorizations, acquisition, property book accountability, utilization, and maintenance. The IEMS is a user- 
friendly, Sperry based, real-time system incorporating a relational data base and ad hoc query capability. Last 
year IEMS was selected by DOD to serve as the baseline for the future Defense property management system. 
That system will be titled the Defense Property Accounting System (DP AS) and is projected to be available for 
AMC implementation sometime in FY95. The SIM A was selected as the assigned system developer. 

The AMC I&SA held an IEMS Business Process Group (BPG) meeting on 10 June 1994 following the AMC 
Installation Logistics Workshop. The group analyzed 45 System Change Requests (SCRs) for possible 
incorporation into IEMS and DP AS. Eighteen SCRs were approved for incorporation into DPAS and 17 were 
approved as changes to IEMS. One approved SCR involved the actual conversion of IEMS users to DPAS. The 
remainder were approved to provide customer maintenance and support pending conversion to DPAS. The BPG 
members, recognizing that DEMS would soon be replaced by DPAS, opted to approve for IEMS only those SCRs 
for which a regulatory requirement existed or for which the payback period was approximately one year or less. 

During September 1994 AMC I&SA and several BPG members participated in the initial DPAS software 
acceptance test at SIMA-East. Results of that test suggest that a good deal of work remains to be done before 
DPAS can be implemented in AMC. No implementation schedule has been published. 

The Integrated Requirements and Purchase Request System (IRPRS). The IRPRS is an Army system 
derived from an automated system used at the U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering 
Center. This system will automate the manual supply request process from the customer to the supply support 
activity, permit faster processing, and make available automated status to the customer for open supply requests. 

AMCEN is a significant member of the Army team studying the means to standardize automation of these 
tasks. The DCS made one visit for systems design in FY94. The system is projected for implementation to all 
Army installations in FY97. 

AMC Automated Systems - Release Management Fielding and Oversight. An AMC Information 
Management Council (IMC), consisting of three principal deputies to the AMC Commanding General, directed 
formation of a Process Action Team (PAT) devised of Business Process Managers (BPMs). The purpose of the 
PAT is to develop a new process for the release of SCRs to AMC automated systems. The PAT's near term 
objective is to analyze requirements and develop a standard release management and fielding process for the 
AMC Commodity Command Supply System (wholesale stock record accounting), the Standard Depot System 
(wholesale custodial records and installation stock record accounting), and other AMC standard installation 


Resource Management 


logistics systems. The PAT's long term objective is to analyze oversight and organizational structure required 
to manage AMC's wholesale and installation logistics systems in both the Legacy and DOD Standard Systems 
that will be introduced into AMC. 

Workshops and Conferences 

The AMC Installation Logistics Workshop. This workshop was held in Moline, EL, with 297 participants 
addressing current installation problems and concerns. The agenda was developed based on installation responses 
to a questionnaire provided to all units during January 1994. Topics selected pertained principally to Equipment 
Managers, Property Book Officers, Accountable Property Officers, and their staffs. The workshop keynote 
address was "Innovation in Government" presented by Mr. Jack Pryor, President of the Army Management 
Engineering College. Mr. Pryor was followed by Mr. Mario Lopez, Chief of Engineering Services at Corpus 
Christi Army Depot, who presented "Innovation in Government - An Installation Perspective." Subsequent 
agenda topics are listed below. 

Participants were provided rating sheets for each 
session to rate on a scale of one to five (one being the 
lowest rating, five being the highest). The workshop 
average was four. Attendees were also provided 5x7 
cards which they could use to make additional 
comments and to ask questions which were not 
covered during the workshop. All comments and 
questions were addressed and their initiators were 
informed of any resulting actions taken. 

The AMC I&SA conducted similar workshops in 
1986 and 1990. Attendee comments have always 
indicated that the workshops have been a most 
worthwhile educational experience. With the rapid 
turnover of installation personnel currently being 
experienced, the requirement for future workshops 
will be closely monitored. 

Acquisition of Ozone Depleting Chemicals 

Alternative Fuel Vehicles 

Ammunition Accounting and Controls 

Analysis of Changes to AR 71-13 

AR 710-2, Update 14 

Base Level Commercial Equipment Funding 

Capital Asset Accounting 

Career Management For Equipment Managers 

Command Equipment & Supply Management Reviews 

Compliance Review Lessons Learned 

Continuing Balance System - Expanded 

Defense Utilization and Marketing Office Operations 

Equipment Authorization Management 

Equipment Management Reporting 

Equipment Utilization Management 

Excess Property Management / BRAC 

Fleet Management Issues 

Impact of Changes to AR 600-55 

Logistics in the Corps of Engineers 

Maintenance Operations 

Management of Logistics Data 

Property Accountability Issues 

Reports of Survey 

Single Stock Fund 

Supply Automation Initiatives 

The Army Strategic Mobility Program 

The Automated Tool Inventory Control and Tracking System 

The Command Supply Discipline Program 

The Defense Property Accounting System 

Use of Credit Cards 

The AMCCOM Equipment and Property 
Management Workshop. The AMC I&SA was 
invited to participate in this workshop held in 
Davenport, IA, in November 1993. Activity 
personnel moderated a discussion on the General 

Services Administration (GSA) Fleet Management System, conducted formal briefings on the Command Supply 
Discipline Program and Report of Survey policies and procedures, and also gave a presentation on the AMC 
Compliance Review Program which includes the CEMPR, ATMS, and ESP. 

Equipment Management 

Authorization Management. The AMC I&SA, as proponent for Section HI of AMC unit TDA, participated 
in the semiannual HQDA TDA management of change windows (January-March and July-September). Activity 


Resource Management AMCEN 

personnel processed approximately 250 TDA input change packages during the open windows, ensuring that 
AMC TDA equipment authorizations were properly input for subsequent transmission to HQDA. In addition, 
over 500 additional authorization related documents were processed during FY94. 

Maintenance Management During FY94 AMC I&SA personnel analyzed over 35 requests for waiver of 
established maintenance expenditure limits and initiated repair, acquisition, and equipment redistribution actions 
for a savings of over $1 .3M. 

Fleet Management. Lone Star AAP's implementation of the GSA Interagency Fleet Management System 
signaled the completion of AMC's conversion to GSA vehicle leasing. Over 1 1 ,000 vehicles were converted to 
GSA lease since 1986 when the conversion effort was launched. Approximately 2,000 vehicles could not be 
converted. These include fire trucks, HAZMAT vehicles, and other special purpose / special design vehicles. 
Of these, over 45 percent need of replacement. Action is ongoing to locate a source of funding for these items. 

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 ultimately requires 75 percent of the Federal light-duty fleet to be operating 
on alternative fuels by 1999. While few major AMC units are located in the non-attainment areas which are the 
initial focus of this effort, AMC I&SA is in the process of developing an AMC plan for conversion / proliferation 
of Alternative Fuel Vehicles (AFV). The principal goals of AFV usage are to clean up the air and lessen our 
dependence on foreign oil sources. The AFV usage will not be cheaper than conventionally fueled vehicles. 
Besides the increased initial investment for purchase or conversion, there are additional expenses associated with 
fuel distribution. The AMC I&SA will have more information concerning the projected cost of the effort and an 
AFV conversion and proliferation plan during FY95. 

Fire truck replacements and shortages remain a problem within the Command. The AMC units have a 
requirement for replacement of 28 overage trucks. The Command is short seven trucks, which includes one 
tanker, four pumpers, and two crash / aircraft trucks. Action has been initiated by AMC I&SA to inform 
ATCOM of these requirements and provide justification. Action has also been taken by AMC I&SA to identify 
and acquire excess fire trucks from Europe. Funding shortages have kept ATCOM from providing our 
replacements and filling our shortages. Europe has not cooperated in the shipment of identified excess trucks. 
Action is ongoing to resolve this issue, which has been identified as a material weakness. 

Other Workshops 

Worldwide Supply and Maintenance Conference, Harrisburg, PA 

Worldwide Food Service Workshop, Fort Lee, VA 

Third Annual Global INFOSEC Partnership Conference, Fort Huachuca, AZ 

Army Food Management Information System (AFMIS), Fort Lee, VA 

AFMIS, Fort Bragg, NC 

AFMIS, Indiantown Gap, PA 

Distribution Standard System (DSS) Interface Conference, Fairfax, VA 

DSS Interface Conference, Chambersburg, PA 

DPW Combined Training Workshop, Las Vegas, NV 

Defense Petroleum Support Center, Philadelphia, PA 

LOGS A Major Item Conference, Hagerstown, MD 


Resource Management AMCMI 


Special Access Program (SAP) Oversight 

The creation of the Intelligence and Technology Security Activity gave the Technology Generation Team 
responsibility for SAPs and sensitive activities. AR 380-381 defines this role. This organizational change had 
little impact on the SAP management and oversight process. One exception is the reduction in the manpower 
being dedicated to SAP support. 1 

AMC established no new SAPs during FY94. AMC did restructure a sub-compartment of an AMC-managed 
SAP as a stand alone SAP. It came under a Program Executive Officer (PEO). AMC did request establishment 
of a new SAP. However, the DA Working SAP Oversight Committee (S APOC) recommended it become a sub- 
compartment until they understand the technology better. Several AMC-managed SAPs restructured during 
FY94 to segregate new and existing efforts into separate sub-compartments. One AMC-managed program 
transitioned to a PEO and subsequently disestablished. All the above is consistent with the DOD trend to reduce 
the overall number of SAPs. 

The Army and AMC completed the final actions in FY94 to transition four Program 1 1 -funded SAPs to 
USSOCOM proponency. AMC will serve as the executive agent and continue to manage these programs. 

The DCSINT held five meetings of the AMC Special Access Program Oversight Committee during FY94. 
This body reviews all AMC SAPs at least annually and before their being reviewed by the HQDA SAPOC 
process. It reviewed ten programs, nine existing programs and one Prospective SAP (PSAP). They 
recommended the nine SAPs for revalidation and the VCSA approved the recommendation every time. As 
indicted above, the DA Working SAPOC made the PSAP a sub-compartment of an existing SAP for further 

The DCSINT coordinated and managed SAP inspections and audits from external inspection/audit activities. 
All responses to findings were consolidated and reported through the Fix-it process for closure. The DAIG 
inspected most of AMC SAPs. The Army Audit Agency conducted three audits of specific functional areas. 
Each of these audits involved multiple SAPs at different locations. AMCMI could resolve or show sufficient 
progress on all findings during the Working Fix-it. This precluded having any findings briefed to the General 
Officers' forum. 

Foreign Disclosure Statistics 

At the end of FY94, AMC had 215 foreign national representatives assigned under various Army certification 
programs. During FY94, AMC processed 226 foreign requests for information and 3458 requests to visit AMC 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section is taken from the Deputy Chief of Staff for 
Intelligence historical submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCMI 

Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty 

AMCMI has completed the sixth year of the INF Treaty, which runs through 2001. Representatives of the 
Russian Federation can inspect four AMC installations under the terms of the treaty: (Longhom Army 
Ammunition Plant (LHAAP), TX; Pueblo Army Depot Activity (PUDA), CO; Redstone Arsenal (RSA), AL; 
Dugway Proving Ground, UT). The treaty permits them 15 inspections through 1996 and 10 a year after that 
until the treaty ends. PUDA, LHAAP, and RSA received an inspection during the fiscal year. 

AMCMI is responsible for the on-site inspection aspects of the treaty. This includes monitoring notification 
procedures and preparing sites to hold inspection visits from a counterintelligence and operations security 
standpoint. AMC conducted an annual meeting for AMC participants in this program, which MICOM held. 
During the meeting the participants suggested that AMCMI assume overall AMC responsibility for the treaty, 
effective 1 October 1994. 

Chemical Initiative 

The US and USSR signed the Memorandum of Understanding for a bilateral verification experiment and data 
exchange in September 1989. Ten AMC sites were designated as declared chemical facilities subject to 
inspection. The Executive Agent for Chemical Treaty Compliance, CBDCOM, and the On-Site Inspection 
Agency, conducted the following at AMC chemical sites: familiarization visits; mock inspections; joint training 

AMCMI provided counterintelligence and operations security support to the Executive Agent. This involved 
the following: participation in planning meetings and OSIA activities; reviewing applicable portions of the 
chemical treaty implementation plan; visits to the following chemical sites: Newport Army Ammunition Plant 
(AAP), IN; Louisiana AAP, LA; Hawthorne AAP, NV; Rocky Mountain Arsenal, CO; PUDA, CO. The DCS 
also helped in the Russian Intern program, designed to teach Russian engineers how to destroy chemical agents. 
PM Chemical Demilitarization sponsors the program. Pine Bluff Arsenal, AR and Tooele Army Depot, UT, were 
subject to real-world inspections under the Wyoming MOU. 


The OPEN SKIES Treaty was signed on 24 March 1992, and ratified in November 1993. It will become 
active in FY95. It opens the signatory states to overflights by others in aircraft equipped with approved sensors. 
The U.S. will have 4 overflights the first year, 31 the following two years, and 42 per year after that. DOD 
monthly practice-flights have allowed AMC to perfect its notification system. AMCMI published an interim 
OPEN SKIES Notification Plan and will publish a final plan upon receiving the HQDA plan. The DCS expects 
very few changes from the interim plan. 

Operations Security (OPSEC) Management 

AMCMI manages the AMC OPSEC program and provides guidance and assistance to subordinate 
commanders in carrying out OPSEC at all levels. Typical activities included the following: publication of a 
quarterly newsletter and periodic memoranda; briefing exercise participants on OPSEC principles; writing 
OPSEC annexes for AMC operations plans; security training quotas for AMC OPSEC specialists; preparing sites 
for treaty inspections. AMC nominees won Army individual and installation OPSEC awards for the year ending 


Resource Management AMCMI 

30 September 1993. Anniston Army Depot (ANAD), AL, received the organizational award. Mr. David 
Hundley, ANAD OPSEC officer, received the individual OPSEC officer award. 

Current Intelligence / Headquarters Supp ort 

AMCMI provided daily intelligence to the Command Logistics Operations Center supporting Operations in 
Rwanda, Somalia, and Haiti. The DCS also started a new product entitled "Hot Spot Update." It is a two-page 
overview of the world's hot spots. They distribute it twice a week within the HQ and to major subordinate 

Special Security Office (SSO) / DCSINT 

Mission. The Special Security Office's mission is the following: provide Special Compartmented 
Information (SCI) in support of the AMC mission; ensure compliance with all applicable directives, policies, and 
regulations; ensure AMCMI properly accounts for SCI; provide guidance to the major subordinate commands 
(MSCs). It is also responsible for the management and oversight of the SCI system through an inspection 

Personnel. The office had four authorized positions and had personnel assigned to four positions. 

Major accomplishments. During FY94, the office conducted six inspections. This was to comply with 
Army Regulation 380-28, The Army Special Security System, and to resolve a DA Inspection finding. Secondly, 
the SSO staff increased their efforts in support of contingencies during the Rwanda and Haiti operations. 

Inspection Program. In FY93, the Special Security Group, Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), 
under DA authority, inspected HQ AMC's SCI management. The major finding in the inspection was the lack 
of carrying out the Inspection Program required of all MACOMs. They resolved this finding during FY94. The 
DCSINT budget allocated funds to conduct six inspections. The sites inspected were: SSO Vint Hill farm 
Station, SSO Adelphi, SSO White Sands, SSO TECOM, SSO Dugway, and SSO CECOM. The AMC inspecting 
officials commended all sites. Lack of funds and personnel for this function did not affect the MSCs in 
maintaining proper SCI management and control. 

However, during this FY, some people recommended changes to the SCI system. The inspection function 
will change from an inspection emphasis to a more positive overtone, as in assistance visits. This change will 
still allow the MACOM Senior Intelligence Officer to carry out his oversight responsibility of MACOM's SCI 
status. They expect this change and many others in the second half of FY95. 

Su pport to Contingencies 

During Rwandan and Haitian operations, the SSO increased its support for DCSINT analysts' briefings and 
the accesses of deploying personnel. The SSO stayed operational during the weekends to ensure the analysts 
received and used SCI traffic. During this period, they received 7,478 messages through the SCI communications 
channels (an increase of more than 200) and sent 1,818. The overall totals for FY94 were 43,047 messages 
received and 12,841 messages sent. To keep deploying personnel informed within the SCI scope, SSO sent 25 
temporary access messages to the various deployment sites. 


Resource Management AMCMI 

Statements of Intelligence Interest (SID 

Each AMC subordinate who has a requirement for intelligence support has a Defense Intelligence Agency 
(DIA) Customer Account. Customers show DIA their general requirements for recurring and nonrecurring S&T 
finished intelligence products through their Statements of Intelligence Interest. AMC's Requirements Manager 
worked with each subordinate to ensure they have properly identified and stated their requirements in their SII. 
The Manager also helped them in entering these requirements in an HQDA Automated Intelligence Requirements 
System (AIRS) database. AMC SIIs are 100 percent up-to-date. 

U.S. Army Technical Detachment (ATP) Intelligence Account Established 

AMCMI helped ATD in identifying their present and future intelligence requirements. The office established 
SII, through DIA, by which ATD will automatically receive intelligence supporting their mission and function. 

Product Evaluations 

The customer initiates the intelligence cycle by the identifying and submitting requirements through the 
intelligence chain of command. It responds to time-sensitive, quick reaction, requirements as received. They 
satisfy continuing requirements and long-term requirements through an annual production program. They update 
this program regularly with production assignments identified by means of formal Scientific and Technical (S&T) 
intelligence tasks. These tasks levy one-time and recurring production responsibilities on production centers. 
They also approve the flow of raw data and expenditure of S&T intelligence resources. 

To provide accurate and timely S&T intelligence to DOD customers, DIA developed a family of S&T 
intelligence products. This family provides a broad range of support and satisfies the repetitive and continuous 
intelligence requirements of the customers. 

AMC's Requirements Manager, through official tasking to the AMC subordinates, requires periodic customer 
evaluations of DOD S&T intelligence products. The Requirements Manager matches finished intelligence that 
they have published to answer a specific intelligence requirement. By conducting these product evaluation 
surveys and analyzing the results, they decide the usefulness of the publications and customers' satisfaction. 

Requirements for Threat Support 

AMC is driving five major threat product lines: Technology with Military Impact (TMI), Weapon 
Acquisition Study (WAS), Battlefield Development Plan (BDP), Russian Battlefield Development Plan (RBDP), 
and Land Threat Environment Projection (LTEP). The TMI product line is an in-depth study providing 
worldwide coverage of advanced and emerging technologies important to DOD. 

The WAS product line is a series of studies building on the work done by technology and system analysts. 
They integrate it at the treasuries level, adding factors like tech base, economics, and politics that constrain 
technologically possible futures. The BDP product line reports on the tactics and doctrine of specific countries. 
Primary focuses are on general military intelligence. 

The RBDP drives the tasking for an intelligence threat document that provides detail on Russian plans and 
materiel for operations. They gear the RBDP series of documents toward the operational threat. It focuses on 


Resource Management AMCMI 

factors such as equipment, personnel, training, tactics, and doctrine. This study addresses the major categories 
of missile, ground, naval, aerodynamic, and space weapon systems, subsistence, and scientific / technological 
developments. The RBDP study provides the basis for forecasts and threat assessments. The RBDP study 
provides past developments, current capabilities, and future estimates. 

The LTEP requirement drives the tasking for the intelligence acquisition support and combat development 
product line. It supports the materiel acquisition process by defining "challenges" that foreign systems and 
operating environments pose to U.S. materiel. Separate volumes focus on the threats to specific U.S. battlefield 
operating systems. It delineates the full range of foreign technology that could affect U.S. weapon systems 
effectiveness. It screens these technological options for their likelihood of applying in a wide range of foreign 
forces. The resulting "risk" profile delineates how widely proliferated certain technological capabilities are, both 
in numbers and using countries. 

Threat projections are technical intelligence assessments from that help develop general or broad threats to 
specific forces or systems. They are an extension of data and analyses contained in studies and trend studies. 
They emphasize characteristics, capabilities and vulnerabilities of current and projected enemy weapons and 
systems operating interdependently within realistic scenarios. These projections cover a period of up to 25 years 
into the future. They are primarily in support of major proposed or ongoing weapon system projects for research, 
development, and acquisition. 

Production Requirements (PRs) 

When someone has identified a gap in intelligence, the Intelligence Community (IC) receives a Production 
Requirement (PR) for production. Presently, AMC has 80 percent of total Army intelligence production 
requirements. The AMC Requirements Manager ensures they properly format these PRs and tracks the 
requirement for a timely and accurate response. 

Army Intelligence Priorities Process 

It is essential the AMC create a single, authoritative set of priority Approved apins 

... . ._,.._... . . , _, , Regional Issues and Threat Projections 

intelligence requirements to support Its Title X mission. AMC has Key Weapons Science and Technologies 

grouped its intelligence priorities into Army Priority Intelligence Needs Sustainmem 

(APINs). APINs are broad prioritized statements of commander's JSjSJJJS, Terrorism / Oiminai Threat 

intelligence needs. These APINs are major questions concerning foreign Foreign Military Forces 

military forces and technological trends, including specific countries and Operations other Than war 

* ° ° r Weapons of Mass Destruction 

time frames addressed. The approved APINs are listed. All AMC PRs Proliferation / Arms Control / Technology Transfer 

have a tie to an APIN. This will ensure AMC can fulfill its Future Strategic Environment 

^^cdic3.l Fsctors 

responsibilities under Title X and allocates resources effectively. climate / weather / Terrain 

Time Sensitive Requirements 

AMC submitted 250 time sensitive requirements to the Intelligence Community (IC) during FY94. They 
responded all time-sensitive requirements quickly. The intelligence updated threat data and to meet milestones 
in support of many various programs. 


Resource Management AMCMI 

Technology Security 

During FY94, the Technology Generation Team assumed responsibility for the Technology Security 
Program. DA has told AMC to prepare Advanced Technology Assessment Reports (ATARs), Technology 
Assessment / Control Plans (TA / CPs), and other quick reaction analyses. These serve as tools for decision 
makers when assessing technology release and foreign disclosure policies. Under this program, AMCMI 
obligated more than $1M to the following sites: Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Institute for Defense 
Analysis, and AMC RDECs. This money is for reports on specific technologies / subject areas as recommended 
by the RDECs. A headquarters committee, chaired by the Principal Deputy for Technology, ranks these areas. 
The DCS also developed and ranked, using the same process, a list of technologies / subject areas to address in 

AMCMI provided intelligence support in many areas, including the "Golden Nuggets" effort. They assessed 
technologies from the Former Soviet Union to decide their potential benefit should the U.S. get them. 

Modeling and Simulation (M&S) 

AMC DCSINT took a more active role in M&S this year. In October, AMCMI briefed the DA ADCSINT 
on roles and responsibilities and on Verification, Validation and Accreditation in M&S. 

The PM for Instrumentation, Targets and Threat Simulators' (PM-ITTS) Threat Simulators Management 
Office (TSMO) raised an issue on their mission. Specifically, they were concerned about the simulation of threat 
forces like Computer Generated Forces (CGF). Distributed Interactive Simulations (DIS) uses Computer 
Generated Forces. AMCMI discussed the matter with the following: DA DCSINT, the Army Modeling & 
Simulation Management Office (AMSMO), TRADOC DCSINT, AMSAA, the National Ground Intelligence 
Center (NGIC), the DIA Modeling & Simulation Coordination Group and PM-ITTS. The DCS also researched 
the Army M&S Master Plan and the DIS Master Plan. Finally, the DCS determined that: 

• The TRADOC Analysis Command has proponency for CGF, the area into which TSMO wanted to expand. 

• STRICOM, the parent organization of PM-ITTS, has clearly defined responsibilities in DIS as laid out in 
the DIS Master Plan; these responsibilities do not include developing CGF. 

• Any expansion of TSMO's role in the simulation of threat forces needs agreement from TRADOC, the 
proponent for CGF. 

AMCMI expects future action on this topic as DIS, and the technology that drives it, is not yet mature. 

Foreign Materiel Acquisition and Exploitation 

Since 1993, the Army Foreign Materiel Program has taken on a new focus and direction. Many threat 
weapon systems manufactured outside the Former Soviet Union are on the Army's Top Ten most wanted items 
list. Again, AMC-input aided compiling this list. AMC requirements for specific Rest-of- World (plus FSU) 
threat weapon systems (from S&T and R&D perspectives) played an integral role. 


Resource Management AMCMI 

AMC laboratories and R&D Centers remained busy performing exploitations / evaluations of many threat 
weapons / items obtained by Army Intelligence elements. These evaluation / exploitation results were published 
DOD-wide under Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) publications and supported AMC R&D and technology- 
base efforts. 

D650 Program 

The AMC D650 Program evaluates small quantities of predominately free-world (foreign) items / equipment. 
These represent emerging / leading-edge technologies and latest engineering designs that support U.S. Army 
technology-base requirements. During FY94, the program had a budget of $3,971 M, 32 approved (funded) 
projects, and attained a 98.5 percent obligation rate. Each year, HQDA and OSD review R&D gains statements 
and they are briefed on the status of the program. Although they are still evaluating most FY94 projects, they 
list a few examples affecting DOD and the Army below: 

• WAS A OURO Antibacterial Film. A film developed in Japan; used to retard the growth of some bacteria 
known is Listeria. Listeria bacteria can grow even under cold temperatures. Film is added to pouches of 
perishable food to help retard the growth of Listeria and extend food "shelf-life." Initial evaluation shows 
WAS A OURO film to be effective and further evaluations are talcing place during FY95. The result of these 
evaluations could save the U.S. Government millions of dollars in food storage costs. 

• Foreign Rotorcraft Technologies. Leveraging technologies in the Former Soviet Union, ATCOM began work 
with the Russians in FY94 on Rotorcraft Technologies. Included under this umbrella heading are projects 
dealing with single-crew / pilot workload, conformal gearing and rotorblade deflection. This project 
continues into FY95 and preliminary findings are promising. 

AMC Intelligence Automation Effort 

During FY94, the Office of the DCSINT broke new ground in the DOD intelligence automation support area. 
Because of the Acquisition Support Team, HQDA provided "seed" funding ($340K) to the AMC DCSINT's HQ 
AMC automation effort. With this funding, they identified equipment, resolved accreditation issues, and set up 
automation training for AMCMI personnel. 

HQ AMC will be an official Department of Defense Intelligence Information System (DODIIS) site. They 
project that HQ AMC will be functional and hooked into DODIIS by the end of December 1994. This will allow 
AMC to provide "real time" intelligence to customers in the field and at the Headquarters. Plans are to make 
AMC Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs) "automation healthy" with basic support for DODIIS connectivity. 

Threat Support Documentatio n 

Per DOD directives, Army materiel development programs requirement threat support documentation. These 
are "fair warnings" of "showstoppers" that may, when the systems are eventually in service, degrade or negate 
their effectiveness. The AMC FIO community document is the System Threat Assessment Report (STAR) for 
an ACAT I or II program. It is a System Threat Assessment (STA) for ACAT HI and IV programs. They serve 
R&D authorities as accurate and timely references on competing or adversarial foreign systems. They include 
narrative discussions of operational and regional environments likely to affect their programs. 


Resource Management AMCMI 

In recent years, changes in threat, U.S. military priorities, and budgets have brought increased scrutiny to 
RD&A programs. In many respects, the quality of supporting STAR / STA material is now more important than 
ever before. 

DCSINT AMC monitors the threat support process. It acts as "honest broker" between AMC's MSCs and 
PEO / PMs and HQDA and the DIA. Compared with the other services, HQDA and AMC have few problems 
with the quality or empirical content of STAR / STA's. 

Acquisition Systems Protection Planning (ASPP) 

The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition mandated the ASPP requirement in 1990 and began 
implementation the following year. They define it as safeguarding technical data on defense systems under 
development. This prevents unauthorized disclosure and ensures delivery to U.S forces with the system's life- 
cycle uncompromised. 

DCSINT AMC held a conference for AMC FIO / SIO personnel assigned ASPP responsibilities in February. 
They produced and distributed editions of the DCSINT AMC ASPP Update (newsletter) in April and July. 

HQDA (DAMI-CI) held an Army-wide workshop in September. They also held ASPP Methodology 
Working Group meetings (involving only Washington area staff) on an approximately monthly basis. DAMI-CI 
sponsored and funded the ASPP training course twice during the year, both in May, at CECOM and MICOM. 

At the DOD-level, ODASD(I&S) held several ASPP Working Group meetings during 1994. Further, they 
drafted, coordinated, produced and eventually distributed the ASPP Manual DOD5200.1-M beginning in March. 
They also created a draft ASPP Workbook, from material set apart from the manual. They distributed this for 
coordination over the summer, but it has yet to appear in final form. 


Resource Management 


Organization and Manpower 


The authorized strength for the DCS for 
Personnel (DCSPER) for FY94 was 133 civilians and 
17 military positions. This made a total of 150. Mr. 
Harold E. Bowman, the Chief of the Training & 
Career Development Division, retired in April 1994. 
Mr. Phillip P. Ferguson, Civilian Personnel Officer, 
was selected to replace Mr. Bowman in June 1994. 
Ms. Nancy Crane became the Acting Civilian 

ODCSPER Personnel 
Executive Officer 
ADCSPER (Adjutant General) 
ADCSPER (Family/Community Act) 
SES/Clas/Prog Eval Div 
Training & Career Development Div. 
Transition/Staffing / Employment Div. 
Acting Civilian Personnel Officer 
Security & Law Enforcement/Provost Marshal 
Plans, Program Budget & Operations Office 

Mr. George L. Jones 
Colonel Arthur J. Gipson 
Major Wendell K. Quash 
Colonel PhilipR. Sterbling 
Mr. Donald J. Helbig 
Ms. Janice M. Lynch 
Mr. Phillip P. Ferguson 
Mr. Roger M. Edwards 
Ms. Nancy Crane 
COL Joel S. Dickson 
Ms. Gloria N. Showers 

Personnel Officer when Mr. Ferguson vacated that 
position. Colonel Carl W.S. Chun, the Adjutant General, departed AMC on 19 June 1994. He transferred to the 
Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington. Colonel Philip R. Sterbling replaced him in June 1994. 
The Provost Marshal, Colonel Ronnie D. Alton, left for Fort Benning, Georgia. In July 1994, Colonel Joel S. 
Dickson became the Provost Marshal. 1 


FY94 Reshape Planning and Execution 

Early in FY94, projected funding and funded workload shortfalls required that AMC begin contingency 
planning for a command-wide personnel reduction. This would encompass approximately 3,500 civilian 
employees. AMC established the Reshape Operations Center (ROC) in FY93 to provide oversight and direction 
in Reshape planning and execution. It solicited Reshape assessments from commanders and directors based on 
their FY94 funding guidance. A total of 39 activities responded, projecting a need for Reduction in Force (RIF) 
during FY94. The Department of the Army allowed Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) and 
Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay (VSIP). The initial VERA / VSIP open window period was 1 March - 1 April 
1994. Because of voluntary separations, 23 of the 39 participating activities met their reduction targets, negating 
the need for RIF. Of the remaining activities, only seven ended up having to separate employees involuntarily 
to reach their targeted reduction. In FY94, the total number of involuntary separations throughout the command 
was only 313. The net reduction in civilian personnel strength was 4,430. Of that number, 67 percent (2,971) 
were voluntary separations. 

On 2 November 1993, the Office of the Secretary of Defense delegated to Department of Defense 
components authority to approve RIF. In February 1994, the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army for 
Manpower and Reserve Affairs (AS A(M&RA)) re-delegated certain powers. Major Army Command (MACOM) 
commanders and heads of independent reporting activities received the authority to approve VSIP. They also 
could approve involuntary separation, or transfer of function outside the commuting area, of fewer than 50 
employees. This increased HQ AMC's capability to provide timely responses to the field and maintain more 
effective oversight of those authorities. 

1 Unless otherwise noted, the information in this section was taken from the DCS for Personnel historical 
submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCPE 

AMC Centralized Intern Program 

The Department of the Army's centrally-funded intern program allows MACOMs to recruit new talent for 
entry level positions. It provides resources to cover payroll, training and other related costs during the internship 
phase (generally two years). These resources come from an Army Civilian Training and Education Development 
System (ACTEDS)-funded account. 

AMC field survey results showed FY94 intake requirements needed 399 new interns. AMC began FY94 
with 567 interns on board. Total program cost (on board and the 399 new hires) was $34.8M. The Department 
of the Army allocated AMC only $ 1 6.8M, or 48 percent of AMC's total requirement. The FY94 fund allocation 
provided for 29 new interns (or 8.7 percent of the AMC requirement). AMC recruited interns in the following 
career programs: Civilian Personnel Administration (2), Comptroller (16), Quality and Reliability Assurance 
(10), and Manpower (1). 

The HQ AMC DCSPER Training and Career Development Division, Field Placement Office, Dallas, Texas 
recruited AMC's ACTEDS interns. Recruitment trips included visiting the following: 15 Hispanic Serving 
Institutions; 22 Historically Black Colleges and Universities; 19 colleges and universities where minority student 
enrollment was 50 percent or more; 30 regional job fairs. 

The Field Placement Office also undertook an intern program on-site evaluation to ensure activities 
appropriately administered all program aspects. They visited 14 AMC activities during the period 3 May through 
8 September 1994. No discrepancies were found. 

The School of Engineering and Logistics (SEL) at Red River Army Depot trained one class of interns. The 
class had 14 Supply Management and 18 Materiel Management interns. These classes both began in November 
1993 and the students were graduated in June 1994. SEL also trained one class of 30 Software engineering 
interns. They began their studies in September 1993 and completed in September 1994. One class of 10 Quality 
and Reliability Assurance (QRA) interns began six months of classroom training at SEL in September 1994. 

The U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School (USADACS), Savanna, IL, trained one class of 10 
Ammunition Management interns throughout FY94. Class dates were 18 October 1993 - 22 February 1995. 


Organization and Mission 

Authorized and On-hand Strength (ADCSPER / AG) 
. Authorized Assigned Total Total 

Colonel Philip R. Sterbling arrived at the Mil /Civ Mil /Civ Authorized Assigned 

Headquarters on 23 June 1994. He replaced Colonel H/12 »3 / 13 23 26 

Carl W. S. Chun as the ADCSPER / AG. Colonel Chun left for Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, 

Washington on 19 June 1994. 

Strength Management Division 

CPT Emily B. Graves left for Fort Jackson, SC on 10 January 1994. CPT Marlon K. Beck left for Ft Hood, 
TX on 10 May 1994. Ms. Cynthia M. Trussell replaced Mr. Victor N. Menendez on 27 June 1994. MSG 


Resource Management AMCPE 

Gregory A. Drake arrived on 15 July 1994. He replaced MSG Arthur D. Dealy. MSG Rachel D. McGlothlen, 
Enlisted Branch, retired effective 31 August 1994. MSG Dealy replaced her. 

Personnel Service Center 

Mrs. Brenda J. Brooks-Blalock joined the Center on 22 February 1993 for a period not to exceed one year. 
SGT Charles E. Bagwell, Jr. filled a position that transferred from the Protocol Office to the ADCSPER / AG 
on 31 May 1994. Mr. Anthony W. Bulger, Chief, Policy, Plans, and Services Division retired effective 30 June 
1994. Mr. Victor N. Menendez replaced him. Mrs. Saundra L. Lee retired effective 30 June 1994. Mrs. A. 
Jeanette Hardbower replaced her. SFC James D. Kennedy, PSC NCO departed en route to Korea on 24 
September 1994. SFC William H. Bonney from the AMC Training Office replaced him. 

Command Retention Office 

Two military personnel losses occurred in 1994. SGM Robert F. Suggs replaced SGM Henry L. Brewington, 
who retired in January 1994, as the Command Retention NCO. SGM David A. Bergling, Command Senior 
Reserve Component Transition Program Manager, retired in July 1994. 

Military and Civilian Awards Office 

During a DCSPER realignment, Ms. Thelma R. Dye left for the Policy, Plans, and Services Division on 28 
November 1993. Mr. James O. Williams arrived on 14 December 1993 to fill a vacant position. Mr. Aaron B. 
Payton was terminated effective 19 February 1994. 

Command Strength 

AMC experienced a significant loss of authorizations and a corresponding reduction in assigned personnel 
during FY94. On 1 October 1993, AMC had an authorization of 6,438 with 5,735 soldiers assigned (89 percent). 
On 30 September 1994, the authorization was 5,721 with 5,400 assigned (94 percent). Contingency Forces 
Europe drawdown and the Army's continued downsizing contributed to the loss of authorizations. During FY94, 
our Officer Distribution Plan (ODP) managed to cover 86 percent of our authorizations. This is a 2 percent 
increase from FY93. 

Force Reduction Management Programs 

Strength Management Division provided staff support for many force reduction programs during FY94. The 
Selective Early Retirement Board (SERB) identified 19 officers for early retirement. The Voluntary Separation 
Incentive Program separated nine officers and six enlisted soldiers. The Early Retirement Program separated 1 4 
officers and 49 enlisted soldiers. 

Operational Support for Contingency Operations 

The Adjutant General augmented and supported the DCSPER Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Team 
by meeting mission requirements. With Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs) they provided personnel to 
deploy in Operations Support / Restore Hope (Somalia) and Uphold Democracy (Haiti). AMC deployed a total 
of 79 military personnel during FY94. 


Resource Management 
Personnel Assistance Visits 


The Adjutant General provided assistance visits to msc/sra 

Date Visited 

MSCs and Separate Reporting Activities (SRAs) as JS^iopStons command m'X'iw 

needed or upon request. The Adjutant General visited Chemical and Biological Defense Command 20 September 1994 

the following MSCs / SRAs during FY94: 

Retention Objectives 

For the second consecutive year, AMC met and exceeded its retention objectives in every category. AMC 
achieved 109 percent Initial Term, 1 16 percent Mid Term, and 101 percent of Reserve Component retention 

AMC continued an aggressive Reserve Component transition program. The field Retention NCOs processed 
70 percent of eligible soldiers into Reserve Component Troop Program Units. Historically, the norms have been 
40 percent of eligible soldiers. 

Assistant Secretary of the Army (M&RA) Visit 

AMCPE provided assistance in coordinating the visit of Honorable Sara E. Lister, Assistant Secretary of the 
Army (M&RA) to HQ AMC. The briefing went over AMC reshape strategy, resource management 
documentation and personnel issues dealing with transition of employees. 

Chain Teaching Program 

The Chain Teaching Program was forwarded to all MSCs and SRAs. This was for the required briefing to 
all personnel and family members, if possible. 

Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) 

The DCS coordinated and conducted the Army Physical Fitness Test during the Spring of 1994 for HQ 
AMC. AMCPE tested a total of 80 military personnel and approximately 20 civilians. 

General Staff with Troops Positions 

Staff work was completed to reestablish General 
Staff with Troops positions on the HQ AMC TDA. 
AMC eliminated the positions around 1982. The 
command has now documented the positions for future 

Awards Statistical Data 

The DCS processed 818 military awards and 
certificates for civilian, Army, Navy, Air Force, 
Marines, and foreign military personnel. The following 


Performance - GS 
Performance - GM 
Performance - WG 
Special Act - GS 
Special Act - GM 
Special Act - WG 
On-the-Spot - GS 
On-the-Spot - GM 
On-the-Spot - WG 
Time Off -GS 
Time Off -GM 
Time Off - WG 

Per Award 

Headquarters, AMC 
Per Award 









17 hours 
19 hours 
1 3 hours 







1 2 hours 
















Note: The chart does not include DESCOM, I&SA, and AMEC. Information 
was not available. 


Resource Management AMCPE 

is the incentive awards statistical data for FY94. It includes the average amount of money awarded to an 
employee and the percent of the population recognized. 

Army Family and Community Programs and Services 

Army Family Action Plan. Twenty-three AMC installations conducted Army Family Action Plan (AFAP) 
forums in 1994. They identified issues concerning the quality of life for "America's Army Family." They 
developed, ranked, and assigned issues to lead offices for resolution. Issues that the local commander did not 
have the authority to resolve were forwarded to the Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs). They reviewed the 
issues and forwarded 57 issues to AMC for consideration during our 5th AMC AFAP Planning Conference. The 
conference was in Arlington, Virginia, 19-22 July 1994. 

Fifty-four delegates, representing 10 MSCs and 22 installations, met to review and rank the issues that 
needed attention from AMC leadership. Sixteen issues were briefed to the Commanding General and to the 
AFAP Steering Committee. They returned one issue to the MSC as an active issue. The remaining 15 required 
action from Headquarters, Department of Army (HQDA). They were forwarded for consideration during the 
annual HQDA AFAP conference, 24-28 October 1994. Six issues were briefed to the Army leadership for 

• Military Pay Diminished by Inflation 

• Rate Systems for Variable Housing Allowance (VHA) 

• Privately Owned Vehicle (POV) Storage 

• Montgomery G.I. Bill Benefits Distribution 

• Access to Military and Civilian Health Service 

• Impact Aid to Schools 

Army Communities of Excellence. Nine AMC installations received monetary awards in the Army 
Communities of Excellence (ACOE) competition for FY94. This became capital for continuing the Quality of 
Life (QOL) improvements through ACOE. The ACOE competition netted $1 ,740,000.00 for AMC installations 
as follows: 

• Medium category: Redstone Arsenal (Runner up) $250K, Fort Monmouth (Honorable Mention) $50K. 

• Small category: Red River Army Depot (Chief of Staff Army winner) $ 1 M, White Sands Missile Range 
(Runner up) $250K, Vint Hill Farms (Honorable Mention) $50K, Yuma Proving Ground (Honorable 
Mention) $50K. 

• Special Category: Crane Army Ammunition Activity (Honorable Mention) $25K, Kansas Army 
Ammunition Plant (Honorable Mention) $25K. 

• Most Improved Category - Picatinny Arsenal $40K. 

A total of 20 AMC installations participated in the ACOE competition. In so doing, they made significant 
improvements to the QOL for their personnel and families. 

Morale. Welfare and Recreation (MWR) 

Management / Technical assistance visits. The HQ AMC MWR Division retains a staff of operational 
experts to help installation commanders with improving their MWR programs. Experts respond to specific 


Resource Management AMCPE 

requests from commanders to provide on-site technical or management assistance. During FY94, they conducted 
a total of 18 assistance visits. They provided assistance in the following areas: Operations, Marketing Research, 
Financial Management and Information Services. 

The visits provided an economical means for installation commanders to address problem areas and make 
adjustments to installation MWR operations. Installation commanders' comments have been positive regarding 
accomplishments made during these visits. They recommend use of this valuable business tool to others. 

MWR Training. HQ AMC MWR division conducted two training programs during FY94. These training 
sessions were on Automation / Financial Management and Business Management. This training supported 
Department of the Army initiatives in cash management and the Army-wide Management Information System. 

The MWR Division developed and delivered these training sessions. They awarded Continuing Education 
Units (CEU) to AMC personnel successfully completing the training sessions. The Department of the Army 
approved training plans for awarding CEUs. These CEUs were "value added" to the MWR training. As part of 
the training effort, they provided 'Training the Trainer" instruction. They gave installation personnel instruction 
in the most economical manner. 

MWR Nonappropriated Fund (NAF) Cross-leveling Program. HQ AMC Morale, Welfare and 
Recreation Fund (HQ AMC MWRF) collected monies from the AAFES pay-telephone revenue. These funds 
were "cross leveled" to AMC installations for capital purchase / minor construction projects. During FY94, HQ 
AMC MWRF funded 42 projects for a total of $1 .5M. 

Nonappropriated Fund Budget. CECOM, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, was the alpha test site for the 
nonappropriated fund (NAF) Financial Management Budget System. They successfully entered the NAF budget 
and transferred data electronically to HQ AMC. 

MWR Standard Management Information Systems (MIS). In FY94, AMC's Morale, Welfare and 
Recreation Division (MWRD) became a source for automated solutions for a standard DA MIS. Prototypes 
sponsored by the MWRD were a LAN Central Control System, standard hardware platform; software known as 
Standard Management Information Reports for Finance (SMIRF); Army standard system for reporting MWR 
solvency (Gumball), and a Financial Management Budget System (FMBS). The DA MIS project fielded the 
systems because of MWRD automation accomplishments with these prototypes. These systems represent a 14 
million-dollar investment by the DA MWR Non-appropriated Fund. 

Recently, the Community and Family Support Centers' MWR Board of Directors allocated 40 million 
additional sustainment NAFs dollars to MIS. The MWRD further contributed by selecting two AMC 
installations as Alpha and Beta test sites for DA MWR projects. This ensured that AMC would have a voice in 
future MWR automation initiatives. To further automation advancements, MWRD developed a state-of-art LAN 
for use within a MACOM. The LAN will meet both office automation needs and MWR MIS requirements. To 
date, the AMC MWR network is unsurpassed by any other MACOM. 

MWR Marketing. During this FY, the MWR Division completed the AMC-wide club study. They 
conducted the study because someone suggested it at the HQ AMC Family Action Plan Planning Conference in 
July 1993. Fifteen AMC installations participated in the study. HQ AMC Marketing Specialists distributed a 
questionnaire, visited seven installations (one from each MSC), and conducted patron and manager focus groups. 


Resource Management AMCPE 

They wrote reports for each installation, comparing small, medium, and large AMC installations, and for all AMC 
installations combined. The results have helped identify the problems within the club system and to provide some 
direction for the future. 

Army Regulations 215, 215-1, and 8-7 require installation NAF managers assess their needs triennially for 
annual and long-term planning. Most AMC installations lack the resources for such a project, so the HQ AMC 
Marketing Specialists helped with the survey process. The specialists completed one survey for Selfridge Air 
National Guard Base in this FY. In November 1993, the Community and Family Support Center (CFSC) 
contracted out the patron survey portion of the assessment Army-wide. Currently, the Marketing Specialists serve 
as liaison for the patron survey between the AMC installations and the CFSC. A total of 1 4 AMC installations 
participated in the contract. 

Marketing Specialists helped coordinate and oversee the Food, Beverage and Entertainment Study. General 
John G. Meyer of CFSC directed and Landauer Realty conducted the study at Aberdeen Proving Ground. The 
department served as the liaison between the installation, the CFSC, and the contractor. The Marketing 
Specialists were involved in all steps of the study. This included pre-assessment coordination, survey 
involvement, focus group involvement and participation in site visits with the contractor. 

Marketing has continued to monitor the test merger of combined military and civilian nonappropriated funds 
at two sites. These sites are Blue Grass Army Depot and Rock Island Arsenal. They received monthly reports 
from each test site during the test period; completed two patron surveys at each site to assess customer evaluation 
of the test merger after one year in test status; completed the end of year report briefed to the DOD Army 
Committee. The two sites received approval to extend the test. They may expand the test to six additional sites 
if approved. 

One AMC installation, Fort Monmouth, was selected as a site to receive a Marketing Intern. The MWR 
Marketing Department was involved in the site selection criteria for the AMC installation. It also conducted three 
days of training with the AMC and FORSCOM interns before they reported to their various installations. 

Marketing coordinated a contract to provide "train the trainer" customer service training during this FY. All 
AMC installations had the opportunity to attend this training session. Each attendee received training materials 
(guidebooks, workbooks, and videos) to take back to continue the training as an ongoing process. 

Marketing was responsible for solicitation, coordination, and execution of corporate sponsorship for the 
AMC Family Action Plan Planning Conference. They included pre-conference preparation, conference design 
strategy, conference execution and administrative support in the above effort. The Marketing Specialists acted 
as liaison between conferees and the MWRD staff and between corporate sponsors and MWRD staff. These 
efforts resulted in AMC receiving more than $6.8K in commercial sponsorship and gifts for this high visibility 
AMC event. 

The AMC MWR newsletter received recognition and renown. "MWR Notes" is a quarterly newsletter 
published by the HQ AMC Marketing Specialists. It is distributed Army-wide to more than 600 individuals, 
within other Services, and within the private sector. AMC Marketing published two other publications, a 
promotion manager's guide and a marketing research manager's guide during FY94. The International Military 
Clubs and Executives Association (IMCEA) magazine published them. 


Resource Management AMCPE 

Army Continuing Education System (ACES) - Educational Support for Soldiers FY94. During FY94, 
the ACES provided educational support to soldiers, reservists and family members at 10 AMC Army Education 
Centers (AECs). The large increases in program participation experienced over the last five years moderated 
during FY94. College enrollments declined 4.7 percent from FY93 and degree completions were down 20 
percent. However, FY94 enrollments and degree completions were still higher than FY92. Compared with FY92, 
FY94 college enrollments were 13.5 percent higher and degree completions were 30 percent higher. AMC 
Education Services Officers continued to keep costs under control. They also helped soldiers and family members 
obtain $186,000 in Pell Grant monies that helped them pay for college courses. The AMC ACES program 
manager participated in a DA task force that addressed the issue of Army Tuition Assistance (TA). Adopted 
Task force recommendations include fencing TA funds and placing a strict cap of nine semester hours per FY 
on ATA. 

Army Community Service (ACS). FY94 was an outstanding year for AMC's family support centers. 

• ACS centers set up the Standard Installation Topic Exchange System (SITES) at all installations and 
achieved a 100 percent quarterly update from HQDA. 

• Twenty ACS centers had Family Advocacy Program standards established. 

• Two AMC installations were selected to be pilot sites for the DA strategic plan. 

• All relocation assistance managers updated their SITES training on program application and use. Sixty 
members of the Family Advocacy Case Management Team received training at Fort Sam Houston. 

• Fourteen Exceptional Family Member Program Managers received training on program procedures and 
new policies. 

• The Family Member Employment Program Managers started an AMC Newsletter. 

• All AMC ACS centers have computer capability, and have automated all reports and can send and 
receive E-mail messages. 

• All ACS Program Managers attended a two-week HQDA-sponsored workshop that focused on program 
marketing skills. 

Youth Services. After a 13-month hiatus, AMCPE received approval to fill the headquarters Youth Services 
position. A transition employee was placed in the position of Youth Services Program Analyst in April 1994. 
The employee had a variety of training opportunities to acquaint her with the responsibilities of the position. 

Our installations are experiencing similar problems with extended vacancies in Youth Services programs. 
In addition, some installations have found that their Youth Services positions eliminated to reduce the civilian 
end strength ceiling. Many of our Youth Services facilities are so understaffed that they cannot meet the required 
adult / child ratios for programming. These programs continue to function, but risk the safety and well-being of 
the children by operating when critically understaffed. 

Youth Services, while better funded in FY94, does not have the funds to operate a variety of program options 
successfully. All AMC Youth Services programs, except the Tooele program, underwent inspection in FY94. 
This was done with the annual unannounced Child Development Services inspections. AMCPE conducted a 
week-long training workshop for School- Age Program Directors (CDS & YS) in April 1994. The workshop's 
design was to give installation personnel new ideas for carrying out "quality" school age programs. 

Both Department of Defense and Department of the Army are placing an increased emphasis on school-age 
programs. The Army has identified monies to fund innovative school age programs in FY95. They will also 


Resource Management AMCPE 

provide training, by MACOM, to installation school-age management staff and Directors of Community & 
Family Activities (DCFAs). 

The new Youth Center at Fort Monmouth opened its doors in FY94. The facility had several deficiencies 
that the contractor was to correct. To date, some of these deficiencies remain uncorrected. Services rendered by 
the contractor were not satisfactory. The poor quality of workmanship will result in the installation picking up 
the tab for facility repairs. 

Child Development Services. All AMC Child Development Services programs underwent inspection in 
FY94. Two received recommendations for DOD Certification with commendation, fourteen for full certification, 
and two for conditional certification. The inspectors recommended conditional certification for the two 
installations due to prolonged staff vacancies and inability to meet program standards. Start-up of an Installation 
Child Care Availability Plan, financial management, and Family Child Care subsidies received special emphasis. 

A direct correlation exists between prolonged vacancies in key positions and degradation of program quality. 
AMCPE grants exceptions to the hiring freeze when the requests reach the headquarters; however, many requests 
take weeks / months to come through installations and major subordinate command levels to reach us. 

The National Academy for Early Childhood Programs accredited several centers in FY94: the White Sands 
part-day center, the Rock Island infant-toddler center, and the McAlester child development center. This brings 
the total of Army Materiel Command programs accredited to 14. Six centers still need accreditation in AMC. 
Our goal is to have all AMC child development center programs accredited by the end of Fiscal Year 1995. 

A strong financial management focus let AMC Child Development Services finish FY94 with a NAF net 
income of $143,989. That figure is before depreciation. Our success in this arena is directly attributable to the 
excellent financial management efforts of our installation Child Development Services Coordinators. 

The Military Construction Army project for a 244-capacity child development center at Fort Monmouth 
received an award in Fiscal Year 1994. The Military Construction Army project for the 244-capacity child 
development center at White Sands is reaching the final design stages. An Unspecified Minor Military 
Construction Army project for a 99-capacity child development center at Picatinny Arsenal is being considered 
for approval. This child development center is the worst in Army Materiel Command's inventory and requires 
immediate replacement. 


Resource Management 



Mission. Manpower and Organization 

The mission of the Corporate Information Officer (CIO) is as follows: to advise the CG AMC, AMC staff, 
Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs) and Separate Reporting Activities (SRAs) on the Army Information 
Mission Area (IMA), automation, visual information, telecommunications, records management, publications 
and printing process, and libraries; coordinate information policy and programs with DOD (Department of 
Defense) agencies, HQDA (Headquarters, Department of the Army), and other MACOMs (Major Commands). 
The CIO has staff oversight of the more than 4,000 AMC personnel that provide information services to the 
command; serve as the primary focal point for the Army's Information Processing Centers (AIPC); serve as the 
AMC information Process Owner. 1 

Key Personnel 

Beginning FY94 
Ending FY94 



5 72 72 

6 57 2 1 66 



Term of Service 

Corporate Information Officer 

Deputy, Corporate Information 


Chief, Functional / Technical 

Information Division 

Administrative Officer 

Chief, Systems Oversight 


Chief, Field Support Division 

Director of Information 


Colonel Tommy T. Osborne 
Colonel Charles D. Daves 
Mr. Philip Sternberg 

Mr. John W. Gill, Jr. 

Ms. Barbara Quackenbush 
Mr. Edgar F. Brasseur 

Ms. Mary C. Carroll 
Mr. Harold E. Jarrell 

15 July 1991-1 August 1994 
15 August 1994 - Present 
30 November 1991 - 

29 September 1994 

15 January 1989 -Present 

30 November 1991 - Present 
30 March 1987 -Present 

1 October 1988 -Present 
30 June 1991 -Present 

* Director of Information Management under operational control of Corporate Information Officer 

DISA/DISO Naming Conventions and Standards for Fee-for-Service 

In December 1993, DOD mandated use of fee-for-service by FY95 (1 October 1994). To accomplish this, 
CIO used the Invoice Account Code (IAC) identified in the DISA (Defense Information Services Agency) / DISO 
(Defense Information Systems Office) Naming Convention Standards. As a result, the Corporate Information 
Office took the following actions: 

'Unless otherwise noted, information in this section was taken from the AMC Corporate Information Office 
Submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

• Developed AMC structure for the workload portion of the IAC, and assigned and registered IACs for all 
AMC customers. 

Staffed DISA Fee-for-Service Implementation Plan. 

Wrote a memorandum to DISA requesting funding support to carry out this naming standard. 
Systems Integration and Management Activity (SIMA)-East and SIMA-West loaded and tested executive 
software exits provided by the Executive Software Systems Division (ESSD) of the Information Systems 
Engineering Command. 

• Attend Defense Resource Information Management Systems (DRIMS) training. 

Service Level Agreements (SLA) 

Headquarters, AMC, and Defense Information Services Agency (DISA) established a new SLA. They carried 
out the FY95 SLA and it remains unchanged from the FY94 version. The AMC Chief of Staff, MG Johnnie 
Wilson, signed the SLA on 30 September 1993. SLAs cover automation services for all HQ AMC Defense 
Megacenter satellites. 

Headquarters, AMC, is participating in the development of Naming Conventions and Standards. Defense 
Information Services Agency (DISA) Defense Megacenters (DMCs) will carry out these conventions. They will 
help Fee-for-Service costing. Additionally, standards will allow the megacenters to process more efficiently. 

During FY94 HQ AMC DOIMs (Directorates of Information Management) and AMCIO established a united 
position with respect to operational roles. They designated roles, responsibilities, requirements, and operational 
support related to DOIM's automated mission for Defense Megacenters. DISA and AMCIO are reviewing this 

In FY94, AMCIO-F helped solve many Commodity Command Standard Systems, Standard Depot Systems, 
and unique DOIM system problems. Problems involved operational support provided by DISA Defense 
Megacenters, software errors, and operational support. 

• Army Primary Representative - Participated as the Army Primary Representative for the Education and 
Training (E&T) Functional Working Group (FWG) of the Joint Logistics Commanders (JLC) Joint Policy 
Coordinating Group on Computer Resources Management (JPCG-CRM). Regular meetings took place 
monthly at PRC, Inc. in Crystal City. In April, the E&TFWG members went to a Software Convention in 
Salt Lake City, UT. 

• FY93 Historical Report - Served as the CIO POC and creator of the FY93 Historical Report. Information 
was collected from all Divisions of the CIO, including the DOIM. 

• Ross Years Report - A parallel effort with the Historical Report was a summary of AMCIO activities during 
the Ross Years. A final report went to the AMC Historical Office. 

• Interactive Timing System (ITS) - Received ITS training Picatinny Arsenal, NJ. The system identifies 
response time in a mainframe environment. It has been under development for several years and is being 
fielded to interested AMC activities. The care and feeding and continued support of the system remains at 
Picatinny. The system requires dedicated hardware and software and staff resources. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

• Privacy Act and FOIA - Functioned as Privacy Act and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) POC for the 
command. CIO continued to back up the primary Privacy Act / FOIA POC. 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

During the first quarter of FY94, the FOIA function transferred from the Public Affairs Office to CIO. It 
became an additional task for one employee. Due to the workload, in April 1 994, a dedicated full-time FOIA 
administrator took over the FOIA mission. The program is now running smoothly due to training through 
Department of Defense, Department of Justice and other agencies. In FY94, the administrator handled 66 FOIA 
cases. The transfer mission is consistent with Army Regulation 25-55, The Department of the Army Freedom 
of Information Act Program. 

Congress enacted the FOIA in 1966, with amendments made in 1974 and 1986. FOIA provides universal 
right of access to Federal information. All FOIA requests must be in writing and explicitly detail the data 
requested. All FOIA requests must receive a response within a ten-day period. 

The HQ AMC FOIA administrator works with the MSCs, Department of Army (DA), Department of 
Defense and other federal agencies. HQ AMC compiles data from all AMC activities for the annual FOIA report. 
AMC reported a total of 601 FOIA requests for FY93, at a cost of $ 1 , 1 97, 1 02.84. A total of $ 1 24, 1 87.7 1 was 
collected from the public for fees and services. 

AMC Library Program Office 

Effective 29 November 1993, CIO's Field Support Division underwent reorganization. The AMC Library 
Program Office became a Team within it and the staff of two librarians is unchanged. The Library Program 
Office continues to provide guidance to the field through telephones, electronic assistance, and staff assistance 
visits. During FY94, Mary Ann Nowell, AMC Command Librarian, visited the following AMC libraries: White 
Sands Missile Range (General and Technical Libraries), Yuma Proving Ground (General and Technical 
Libraries), and Rocky Mountain Arsenal Technical Library. Improved communications, networking, and resource 
sharing are top priorities of the AMC Library Program Office. 

AMC Libraries 

At the end of FY94, 35 libraries were in AMC. These included 22 technical libraries, 1 2 post libraries, and 
1 law library. The technical libraries directly support the scientific, research and development missions of their 
parent organizations. General libraries provide educational, recreational, personal, and professional development 
materials to meet the needs of the customers. The law Library provides legal reference and research services and 
resources to help the legal staff in meeting mission requirements. During FY94, no AMC libraries were 
consolidated or closed. 

AMC Library BRAC Installations 

The 1993 Base Realignment and Closure Commission will adversely affect the following AMC libraries: the 
Post Library, Vint Hill Farms Station, and the Technical Library, Belvoir Research, Development and 
Engineering, Fort Belvoir. They have begun drawdown procedures. The professional librarians at both locations 


Resource Management AMCIO 

have found employment elsewhere and no one will backfill their positions. The AMC Library Program Office 
will therefore provide detailed guidance to the remaining staff as the final closure date approaches. 

Library Staffing 

Because of the AMC-wide hiring freeze, the Ufandam t Spepi^is^ Retirin g 

, _„ , _,„ ,.,„.., . . . , . Judith Michal Kwang Hee Streiff George Jones 

Command filled no GS-1410 librarian positions during Dorothy Ward James Hearon Joyce Lohr 

the past year. The listed AMC librarians/technical 

information specialists retired during FY94. Three librarians (Linda Seibl, Linda Cheung and Barbara Fox) 
departed AMC to take other positions in the past year. Mr. Patrick Dore, a Technical Information Specialist at 
ARL, passed away. The command has filled none of the above positions. To date, no AMC librarians have been 
separated from Federal service because of Reductions in Force. 

AMC Librarian Interns 

The Acting Secretary of the Army granted AMC an exception to the DA hiring freeze to recruit AMC 
Librarian Interns. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in Huntsville, AL handled recruitment for the 
three librarian positions. Three interns were selected in October 1993. They began their 12-month training 
period at Redstone Scientific and Technical Information Center in January 1994. The new interns are Cornelia 
Camerer, Sharon Cooper, and Eva Randolph. After training, Ms. Cooper and Ms. Randolph will report to the 
Defense Ammunition Center and School Technical Library, Savanna, IL. Ms. Camerer will report to U.S. Army 
Natick Research, Development & Engineering Center Technical Library, Natick, MA. 

Library E-Mail Access 

During the past year, all AMC libraries finally got e-mail connectivity and with it, Internet access. This opens 
avenues of research into the many on-line sources: university public access catalogs, reference materials and 
databases. It also permits the AMC Library Program Office to transmit electronically much of its correspondence 
to libraries in the field. 

Library Accountability 

A 100 percent revalidation / reestablishment of Accountable Officer appointments for all AMC Library 
Property Accounts was completed in FY94. HQDA allowed ten non-librarians to serve as Accountable Officer, 
as required by AR 735-17, where no GS- 1410s were available. 

Library Networking Tools 

The AMC Library Program Office published a revised Directory of AMC Libraries and a revised Army-wide 
E-mail Directory of Army Librarians in FY94. 

Library Professional Recognition 

The Special Libraries Annual Conference in Atlanta invited Mary Ann Nowell, AMC Command Librarian, 
to present a paper on "Electronic Listservers and the Internet." The Army Library Institute, National Defense 
University, Washington, D.C. invited Jewel Player, Administrative Librarian, to present a paper on "A Librarian's 


Resource Management AMCIO 

Perspective on the Internet." Sybil Bullock, Director, Redstone Scientific Information Center filled out the 
unexpired term of Cynthia Banicki (ODISC4) as Chair, Military Librarians Division, Special Libraries 
Association. Martha Knott, Reference Librarian, Redstone Scientific Information Center, was selected to attend 
Army Management Staff College. 

HODA Administrative Publications Functional Process Improvement 

On 1 4 May 1 992, the Office of the Director of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications 
and Computers (ODISC4) formed a Process Action Team (PAT). Its goal was to review Publications and 
Printing management roles in the post-Defense management Review Decision (DMRD) 998 environment. 

Initial PAT review focused on HQDA staff roles and responsibilities. It also validated the missions and 
functions of the following offices: ODISC4, the Office of the Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the 
Army (OAASA), HQ U.S. Army Information Systems Command (USAISC), and the U.S. Army Publications 
and Printing Command (US APPC). It also developed recommendations for streamlining the publications process. 
ODISC4 issued the initial PAT recommendations on 1 1 August 1992. 

Scoping sessions began the work and documentation toward a formal Functional Process Improvement (FPI) 
of the Army Administrative Publications System. An AMC representative participated in the FPI's "As-Is" 
modeling portions. Later sessions analyzed the Cost and operational Effectiveness issues and the modeling of 
the 'To-Bell" process. 

During FY93 ODISC4 surveyed the Major Army Commands (MACOMs) and selected field elements. They 
wanted comments on the Preliminary Functional Economic Analysis (FEA) for the DOD Publications 
Management FPI Initiative. AMC's 22 June 1994 memorandum on that subject did not concur with the findings 
of the preliminary FEA. It recommended no more Army funds go to the FPI. The major concern was overlap 
between the DOD FPI and functionality already developed for the Army by the JCALS Program. Because of the 
overlap, ODISC4 could not justify the Corporate Information Management (CIM) funds needed to continue the 
FPI. This would likely result in reductions to the Operations and Maintenance, Army (OMA) funds for the 
completion of the FPI. As of the end of FY94, AMC had not received a reply from ODISC4 on the 22 June 1 994 

Departmental Printing Budget 

Funding levels for AMC's FY94 Departmental (Army-wide) Printing Programs was stable in comparison 
with prior year funding leveis. The funding for printing and initial distribution of AMC-sponsored Equipment 
Publications dropped from $5.9M (FY93) to $5.8M (FY94). AMC's Administrative and Supply Publications 
increased its funding from $1 .8M (FY93) to $2.4M (FY94). The net increase in program funding for AMC's 
Departmental Printing Program in FY94 was approximately $500K. Despite this, the funding trend will head 
downward for the next five to ten years as the Army continues downsizing. 

The FY94 funding level again encouraged all publication proponents to examine and set priorities on their 
production requirements. This is in keeping with the priorities outlined in Army Regulation 25-30, The Army 
Integrated Publishing and Printing Program. In general, they gave priority to the following: new or revised 
publications, Force Modernization / equipment fielding requirements, and to publications for ensuring the safety 
of equipment and / or personnel. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

Career Program 34 Management - Information Mission Area (IMA) 

The Chief, Field Support Division, AMC Corporate Information Office, is the Command Career Program 
Manager for Career Program 34 (IMA). During FY94, they aggressively managed the program. More than 
$168,000 in ACTEDS funds came from ODISC4 for specific IMA proficiency training requirements at CECOM, 

Six AMC IMA careerists received long term assignments involving educational programs at local colleges 
or the Army Management Staff College. Two one-week IMA courses were presented on-site by the Army 
Management Engineering College at HQ AMC and ATCOM, St. Louis. A Career Program 34 (IMA) bulletin 
went via electronic mail to activity career program managers throughout the command. The bulletin has had four 
issues published. The bulletin contains information on career program matters and announcements of training 
and professional development opportunities. 

Zip+4 Mail Code Program Implementation 

The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Production and Logistics) directed all locations include a Zip+4 code 
by 30 September 1992. HQDA extended the suspense for carrying it out at pilot installations until 31 December 
1993. All other Army installations had a suspense of 31 December 1994. In June 1994, AMCIO initiated a 
coordinated request to HQDA to cover a $12M funding shortfall for this effort. The "Big Three" MACOMs 
(Army Materiel Command, Training and Doctrine Command, and Forces Command) made the request. It 
projected a need for $3.5M to carry out the program AMC-wide. It submitted an unfinanced requirement (UFR), 
but HQDA did not provide year-end dollars. A street number and name have been designated for the Official 
Mail and Distribution Center on each AMC installation. This satisfies the minimum requirement for carrying 
out the Zip+4 mail code program by 31 December 1994. 

Functional Process Improvement (FPI) for Records Management 

The AMC Records Administrator provided MACOM representation from 27 September through 8 October 
1993. This happened during the Army's FPI AS-IS modeling session of the DOD Records Management (RM) 
Business Process Reengineering (BPR) effort. The effort was to identify better ways to manage the life cycle of 
information contained in records, whatever the medium. The BPR team completed the effort on 31 July 1994. 
They proposed that the DOD migrate to a single record retention schedule by the year 2003. The Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (ASD / C3I) accepted the team's 
findings and recommendations. 

There currently is no satisfactory working model for electronic record keeping in the government. The "one 
book" idea of the DOD's BPR effort is a model electronic record keeping system. The year 2003 should see it 
carried out throughout DOD. 

Digitizing AMC 

The Executive Steering Committee's Information Technology Working Group Task Force to Digitize AMC 
chartered three separate entities in early CY94. They fell under the staff oversight of the AMC Records 
Administrator. They were the following: (1) the Records Management Work Group for which the Industrial 
Operations Command (Prov) has the lead; (2) the Electronic Mail (E-mail) / Bulletin Board System (BBS) Work 


Resource Management AMCIO 

Group chaired by the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command; and (3) the Mailroom Work Group 
led by the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command. 

Initial recommendations from the Task Force directed these groups: (1 ) to reissue AMC Regulation 25-1 , 
Electronic Mail, to include policy mandating the electronic transmission of correspondence, that all offices 
originating correspondence have an official E-mail address, and providing guidance on the establishment of 
individual, group, and office E-mail addresses; (2) to investigate the electronic record keeping system (ERKS) 
outlined in the August 1992 System Design Plan prepared by AIRMICS and implement command-wide ERKS; 
(3) to investigate ways to move large E-mail files such as graphics other than through File Transfer Protocol 
(FTP) over the DDN; and (4) to modernize mailrooms by introducing new sorting / metering systems to speed 
the distribution / dispatch of mail and allow for accurate workload reporting and to prepare for "chargeback" and 
by developing a prototype that will digitize incoming correspondence and allow electronic distribution. 

A final draft of AMC Regulation 25-1 should be ready for staffing by 31 October 1994. A 
videoteleconference in late October 1994 will consider an Automated Document / Records Management System. 
Howard University developed the system. It encompasses the Modern Army Record Keeping System (MARKS) 
and is available off-the-shelf. 

Electronic Record Keeping Workshop 

AMC sponsored an electronic record keeping workshop, held 4-8 April 1994 at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. 
Personnel in the Records Management Division of the U.S. Army Missile Command provided administrative 
support. The Corporate Information Officer tasked attendees with development of a plan for AMC elements to 
manage their records electronically. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and HQDA 
gave overviews of the following: Federal Government policy on Electronic Record Keeping, NARA initiatives, 
and the Functional Process Improvement (FPI) effort for Records Management. Demonstrations were presented 
on several AMC electronic record keeping initiatives. The workshop provided an excellent opportunity for 
records managers and automators alike to meet face-to-face and to exchange their ideas. The workshop was a 

AMC Policy Review - Reduction of AMC Publications. Forms, and Reporting Requirements 

From April 1994 to September 1994, CIO intensively reviewed 570 AMC publications, 303 forms, and 66 
reporting requirements. This review effort resulted in the elimination of 265 publications, 1 16 forms, and four 
reports. This represented reductions of 46 percent, 38 percent, and 7 percent, respectively. Currently, the AMC 
Index of Administrative Publications contains 309 publications, 1 87 forms, and 62 reports in. 

The Chief of Staff instructed proponents that they would automatically cancel each publication, form, and 
report. Exceptions must be justified in writing and approved by their Deputy Chief of Staff or Staff Office Chief. 
The objective was to find out which documents were essential, given the recent efforts to downsize and realign 
business processes. The review effort also supported the National Performance Review objective of reducing 
policy documents by 50 percent. 

Headquarters proponents of AMC policy and procedures undertook the review effort. Field elements 
nominated candidate documents for cancellation. The AMC Office of Command Counsel staffed the results. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

The 1992 effort eliminated the following: 200 publications (a 26 percent reduction), 81 forms (a 20 percent 
reduction), and 51 reports (a 40 percent reduction). The combined 1992 and 1994 efforts eliminated 465 
publications, 197 forms, and 55 reports. 

CD-ROM Initiatives 

The Chief of Staff approved a CIO plan to reduce the paper publications and forms in HQ AMC. AMC 
contracted with the Government Printing Office (GPO) to transfer 394 AMC publications to a single CD-ROM 
at a cost of $78,000. This will enable AMC to save approximately $80,000 annually for printing. AMC will also 
realize a savings of approximately $50,000 annually for the storage and mailing from Letterkenny Army Depot. 
AMC phased out its portion of the operation at LEAD Publications Distribution Facility because it now used 

The CIO and the U.S. Army Publications and Printing Command are working to put more forms on PerForm 
Pro software. The software is distributed Army-wide. They have digitized and designed about ten percent of 
AMC forms for use on PerForm Pro. 

Equipment Reutilization Program 

AMCIO inventoried automation resources and „ Excess Automation Resources 

, , , School Donation Program (Local Area Schools) $852,619.00 

reported excess. It also managed the following: u.s. Army Activities $345,821.90 

Automation Resource Management System (ARMS), Department of Defense Activities $100,3 19.66 

Historically Black Colleges and University / Minority SilSnSfvSS sSiniio 

Institutions Programs, the School Donation Program, 

the Data Processing Installation (DPI) Code File, passwords for AMC activities and conducting subordinate 
activity training and assistance visits. From July 1993 to October 1994, the AMC Corporate Information Office 
redistributed and provided the listed excess automation resources. Third quarter FY94 statistics came in from 
the Defense Automation Resource Information Center (DARIC). AMC reported more excess line items into the 
ARMS Electronic Reporting Systems (ERS) than all other MACOMs combined. 

Single Stock Fund Systems Integration Test 

In May 1994, DESCOM requested CIO find an excess Sperry 5000 / 80 mini-computer so Fort Hood could 
conduct a subject test. CIO searched the ARMS bulletin board and found a Sperry 5000 / 80 at the U.S. Army 
Garrison, Fort Shafter, Hawaii. The office then obtained a redistribution approval from the DARIC and faxed 
a sample DD Form 1 149 to DESCOM. CIO and the Air Force coordinated the shipment to Fort Hood. The 
office also followed through to ensure that the equipment was packed, shipped, and delivered as required. 

AMC Telecommunications 

During this fiscal year, the division continued to provide coordination and oversight support to the field in 
telecommunication areas. 

• Successfully awarded an Administrative Telephone Services contract for Umatilla Depot Activity. This 
contract provides support for the command through a commercial activity (instead of Government personnel) 
to maintain the telecommunication switch. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

• Coordinated with ODISC4, DISA, and AMC MSCs to eliminate Data Pattern Traffic off the AUTODIN 
network. Successfully eliminated 90 percent of the data pattern traffic before the planned cut-over date of 
1 October 1994. 

• Coordinated an effort for the Office of the Secretary of the Army to compile telephone numbers and 
equipment designed for use by the deaf and disabled within the AMC community. 

• FY94 culminated a four-year effort to reduce telecommunications costs. They identified and eliminated 
unnecessary telephone numbers and data circuits. This effort reduced billing charges from $22 million to 
$14 million. 

Sustaining Base Information Services (SBIS) Contract 

The AMC community has participated in and supported the SBIS program from its beginning in 1989. The 
SBIS program is under the Program Executive Officer Standard Army Management Information Systems (PEO 
STAMIS). The Program Manager (now Project Manager) Sustaining Base Automation (PM SBA) received the 
SBIS contract in 1993. With a cut of $35.254M, only the first seven installations may be completed with the 
SBIS equipment and software. 

BG Robert Wynn, Commanding General, Information Systems Engineering Command (ISEC) plans to 
change the Installation Sequence List (ISL). AMC sites will now be below the first seven on the list. AMC will 
not receive any SBIS funding during FY95. Other OMA or OPA funding might obtain some hardware and 
software, for a very few sites. This would come from the SBIS Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 
contract (a separate facet of the SBIS program). AMC continues to participate in SBIS. It sends personnel to 
build new functional descriptions for Installation Support Modules and MACOM Internal Support Modules. 
Both modules may still be available to AMC sites, if the sites have equipment to run such modules. 

Enterprise Information Systems (EIS) 

The EIS idea is a requirement to obtain information from various legacy data bases in accessible and 
understandable formats. Pilot Software, Inc., of Boston, MA, has two similar products: Command Center Plus 
(CCPlus), for use on host UNIX-based computers, and Lightship, for use on DOS-based personal computers. 

The EIS program began at Tobyhanna Army Depot (TOAD). It spreads throughout the Industrial Operations 
Command (IOC). Funding comes from the Joint Logistic Systems Command (JLSC) for prototyping a Depot 
Maintenance (DM) EIS. Development and / or planning for EIS occurs at other Major Subordinate Commands 
(MSCs): the Tank-automotive Command (TACOM), the Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM), the 
Armament Research and Development Engineering Command (ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal (PICA), and the 
Missile Command (MICOM), and at Headquarters Army Materiel Command (HQ AMC). A nearly AMC-wide 
licensing occurs through the DM prototyping, with some sites having independent licenses for Lightship or 
CCPlus. TACOM has a separate, third party license, due to special circumstance. 

AMC has a command- wide EIS Functional Coordinating Group (EIS FCG), Mr. Richard Fischer, IOC, chair. 
The federal government also has an EIS Working Group (EISWG) whose membership has substantial AMC 
membership and involvement. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

Mr. Anthony Valletta (DASDC3I) let the Defense Acquisition and Technology Data Center (DATDC) 
negotiate a Pilot Software, Inc., DOD-wide contract. This contract negates all other contracts with the DOD, 
including those with AMC. IRI Software protested to the GS A. The settlement is nearly $130,000. The new 
DOD contract reduces the number of licenses for both developers and users. Due to the settlement, it will 
increase the per license price for all licenses by $24. Negotiations continue through November 1994 with Pilot 
Software, Inc., on the exact costing of each license. This causes AMC to relicense all of its current licenses, 
except those at TACOM. These critical EIS products obtain information from AMC's legacy and migration 

Global Command and Control System (GCCS) 

The GCCS is the information bridge between CONUS elements of the Department of Defense and the 
OCONUS elements. It will support the mobilization, readiness, deployment, sustainment, redeployment, and 
demobilization from CONUS to the Theater of Operations. The Army has created a demonstration of connectivity 
between existing systems. They will compare this demonstration against other services demonstrations and the 
GCCS will be selected from these demonstrations. 

The Corporate Information Office (CIO) has been working with the DCSLOG to decide AMC's current 
infrastructure and requirements. They notified the Army DCSOPS that the GCCS must include HQ AMC, AMC 
MSC Headquarters, and LOGSA. 

War Reserves Automation 

War Reserves will provision strike forces for contingency operations as needed due to drawdowns, base 
closures and reduced stockpiles. War Reserves, sometimes, places materiel on ships that they must maintain for 
rapid deployment. This requires automation to maintain inventories, find equipment, and provide maintenance 
records for the equipment on the ships. 

The Deputy AMCIO visited Korea with the War Reserves Installation team. They provided technical 
assistance for the project and showed his commitment to the effort. The AMCIO obtained $250K OPA to buy 
processors critical to locating and maintaining readiness of materiel. DESCOM has done well in overcoming the 
technical details required to carry out a worldwide program. The CIO will continue to monitor the automation 
aspects of the War Reserves Program and help when needed. 

Information Management Process Action Committee (IMP AC) 

The Information Management Process Action Committee (IMPAC) was formerly the Information 
Management Systems Review Committee. By direction of AMC Regulation 15-9, Information Management 
Council (IMC), all System Review Committees (SRCs) would be disbanded / abolished. The IMC also directed 
that owners of Acquisition, Logistics and Technology Generation would establish IMC subcommittees. In April 
1994 the Information Systems Review Committee officially disbanded and its subcommittee, IMPAC established 
itself. IMPAC advises HQ AMC CIO in providing guidance for designing, deploying, and managing Information 
Mission Area (IMA) programs within the command. Headquarters AMC CIO will serve as the Chairperson of 
the IMPAC, with the Assistant CIO serving as the alternate Chairperson. Voting membership for the IMPAC 
will consist of the following or equivalent of the following: Corporate Information Officer, the Deputy Chief of 
Staff for Information Management, the Director of Information Management, the Director of the Corporate 


Resource Management AMCIO 

Information Center, the Director of Corporate Information and Technology from each Major Subordinate 
Command (MSC), the Director of Systems Integration and Management Activity (SIMA), and the U.S. Army 
Logistics Support Activity (LOGSA). IMPAC associate nonvoting members will be the following: Information 
Managers other than the voting members identified above, representatives from other IMC subcommittees, CIO 
Division Chiefs, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, who will represent the Information Security aspects 
of the IMA, and other appropriate service providers. Agenda items for the IMPAC cover on-going efforts such 
as: Digitizing AMC, LOTUS Notes, Career Program 34, and Procurement Automated Data Document System 
(PADDS), etc. IMPAC meetings will be at the call of the Chairperson or a majority of the members. 

AMC Mid-Tier Business Information Processing Study (AMBIPS) 

The HQ AMC CIO, with assistance from Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL), recently completed a study 
of AMC's mid-tier business processing infrastructure. The study identified the status, shortfalls, and alternatives 
for meeting shortfalls. It also considered cost, technical and organizational feasibility, and the projected growth 
in capacity requirements. The study suggested replacing the existing hardware / software (mainly Sperry 5000 
systems) with Unix-based supermini computers and network file servers. This enables the full use of client-server 
and relational database technology. It complies with all relative government computing standards, easing 
movement toward an open systems environment. 

The Corporate Information Office (CIO) has been working with Information Systems Command (ISC) to 
obtain OPA funding for this project. ISC has approved some funding in FY95, 96, and 97. CIO has identified 
the sites with the largest concentration of Sperry's that will receive ISC OPA funding. Other MSCs obtained their 
own funding and began procuring hardware / software in FY94. 

Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP) 

The Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP) was initiated in 1988 because of Public 
Law 99-145. It requires the Army to provide maximum protection for the public, post personnel, and the 
environment while disposing of chemicals. 

The program is a joint Department of the Army and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) effort. 
It involves 1 states and 35 counties. Four major subordinate commands (MSC) of AMC are involved and eight 
chemical storage sites. The storage sites are the following: Anniston, Aberdeen, Blue Grass, Newport, Pine 
Bluff, Tooele, Pueblo and Umatilla. 

Installation of communications to support includes the following: 1) In-house wiring at all eight sites; 2) 
System 75 switch upgrade at Umatilla; 3) Contract awarded to install SL-1 switch at Tooele; 4) System 
operational at Blue Grass, Anniston and Tooele. Each site received the Emergency Management Information 
System (EMIS) 2.0 upgrade. 

The Federal Emergency Information System (FEMIS) was developed to support both on-post and off -post 
hazard conditions. The FEMIS BETA test was done and accepted by both the Army and FEMA. 


Resource Management AMCIO 

Integrated Computer Aided Definition Language (IDEF) 

Due to manpower constraints and changes in leadership, AMC stopped business process modeling using the 
IDEF methodology in November 1993. The AMC Chief of Staff subsequently decided in mid-FY94 not to 
continue with IDEF modeling at the HQ AMC level. However, he did permit HQ staff elements who wished to 
do so to continue modeling under the DOD program. They used the $200K available to AMC for that purpose. 
At the close of FY94, three AMC Headquarters Staff elements had expressed interest in resuming IDEF 
modeling. AMCPE, AMCAQ, and AMCIO began preparations for their own modeling with DOD's modeling 
facilitator, Logicon Inc. 

Cost of Defense Megacenter (PMC) Mainframe Processing Services 

Under the Streamlining Information Service Operations Consolidation Study (SISOCS), some AMC 
customers transferred their processing capabilities to the DMCs. This reduced their mainframe reimbursable 
service costs from $38.5M (FY93) to $37.3M (FY94). However, costs were still considered too high by HQ 
AMC and the MSCs / SRAs. Not all customers benefited from the overall cost reduction. Several customers 
claimed that their costs have gone up when compared with pre-SISOCS operating costs. Through reorganization 
and consolidation, the Defense Information Systems Agency is striving to reduce the operating costs of DMCs 
further. A nine percent cumulative productivity goal from the FY93 baseline has been set for FY95. 

Requirement Statement (RS) 

The Requirement Statement is a basic planning document. DA Pam 25-2 requires it to identify and validate 
Information Mission Area (IMA) requirements. The validated Requirement Statement is a cornerstone of the 
IMA Modernization Plan. 

The biannual review cycle, which did not require a Data Base Management System (DBMS), was 
accomplished this FY. The Director of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications, & 
Computers (DISC4) has not fielded the automated support promised in Standard Army Multi-command 
Management Information Systems (STAMMIS), Director of Information Management (DOIM) Management 
Information Systems (MIS). 


Resource Management AMCSA-AR 


Organization and Manpower 

The creation of the Senior U.S. Army Reserve Key Personnel 

/Ttninx aj • i ^«- i , «^j i i COL John E. KaJokerinos Senior USAR Advisor 

(USAR) Advisors Office in January 1994 brought L TC Donald A. Dale Deputy Advisor ARC Training Officer 

Several functions into one Office. Previously, three LT C Neil C. Arnold Resource Management Support Officer 

Officer positions in the USAR Active Guard/Reserve ™<^J ZfiSSSZZZST 

(AGR) existed in Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel 

Command (HQ AMC): a Lieutenant Colonel position, managing Individual Mobilization Augmentation (IMA) 
soldiers, in the DCS for Personnel; a Major position, Mobilization Plans and Training Officer, in the DCS for 
Logistics; the Senior USAR Advisor. The Senior USAR Advisor shared an office with the Senior Army National 
Guard Advisor, but moved to Room 10W18. This was to satisfy the consolidation of USAR functions within 
Headquarters, AMC. Note: On 23 September 1994, LTC Patricia Brewer received a reassignment to Atlanta, 
Georgia. On 12 September 1994, Ms. Cynthina Trussell received a promotion in the DCS for Personnel. 1 

Participation in the AMC Special Events 

COL Kalokerinos coached the AMC General Officer Softball Team (which lost to the Senior Executive 
Service Team). He also supported other events at the AMC Picnic (horseshoes, volleyball, running events, etc.). 

AMC Reserve Component (RC) Training Supp ort 

The primary AMC focus for RC training has been hands-on training opportunities on modern equipment for 
RC maintenance units. This type of enhancement and sustainment (GS level) training support is not available 
to RC units and soldiers at other locations. RC units maintain critical soldier skills by doing tasks and operating 
or repairing equipment at AMC depots and installations. RC units receiving new equipment also receive valuable 
hands-on familiarization training at AMC depots. 

AMC received a formal RC training support mission from HQDA (DAMO) in 1986. The mission included 
AGR instructors and MDEP funding (Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve - OMAR) for the High Tech 
Regional Training Site-Maintenance (HTRTS-M), at Tobyhanna Army Depot. The HTRTS-M supports RC 
repair training on communications and electronic equipment. This is otherwise available only to RC soldiers 
during initial skill training (Initial Active Duty for Training - IADT) at TRADOC schools. 

GOLDEN CARGO and ROVING WHEELS are two RC support exercises that have provided valuable 
training opportunities for participating units. GOLDEN CARGO has supported BRAC actions by moving 
ammunition stocks for the past four years. REEF-EX, another RC training opportunity, will provide a 
"win- win- win" benefit for the RC, AMC, and coastal states. A prototype operation of 100 tanks will take place 
this year (Anniston Army Depot to Mobile, Alabama). 

'Unless otherwise noted, the information in this section was taken from the DCS Logistics historical 
submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCSA-AR 

RC training support, throughout AMC totaled 255,000 man-days in FY93, down from a peak of 372,000 
man-days in FY87. The reduction in RC force structure and transfer of supply activities to Defense Logistics 
Agency (DLA) accounts for most reductions. 

AMC General Officer Reserve Components Policy Council (GORCPC) 

The GORCPC meets quarterly to address Reserve Component (RC) logistical and support type issues. The 
AMC IMA General Officers, liaison members and other AMC staff representatives collectively discuss and 
recommend tasks for AMC staff action. 

General Jimmy D. Ross approved the current AMC GORCPC charter on 9 October 1992. Its membership 
expanded to other Major Commands and DOD agencies as "associate members." These Commands and agencies 
include the following: the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations and Logistics), Military 
Traffic Management Command, U.S. Forces Command, U.S. Army Reserve Command, Combined Arms Support 
Command, HQDA (DALO / DAMO / DAAR), Defense Logistics Agency, Army National Guard, and the Office 
of the Chief, Engineer. 

The GORCPC continues to provide one of a few forums for IMA General Officers to meet together. They 
address RC logistical and support type issues that affect RC unit capabilities and readiness. AMC's leadership 
in this area has increased participation from other commands, agencies, and activities over the past several years. 
Major issues from the FY94 meetings include the following: RC support to the Ammunition Demilitarization 
Plan, GOLDEN CARGO exercise updates, RC support to other BRAC missions, Retiree Recall tests, Cost 
procedures for RC unit training at AIF installations, and other RC equipment and training issues. Previous 
GORCPC initiatives include the following: the High Tech Regional Training Sites-Maintenance, RC equipment 
maintenance, IMA use, depot support to RC unit training; RC Light Equipment Maintenance Companies 
(LEMCO) equipment repair during weekend training periods, and others. 

The GORCPC supported the establishment of REEF-EX 94 objectives and procedures. They provided 
emphasis to staffing and coordination (REEF-EX 94 and other RC training point papers). This initiative shows 
the unique role that the GORCPC fills because of its diverse membership. 

Reserve Component (RC) Transportation Support (Exercise GOLDEN CARGO 94) 

The GOLDEN CARGO 94 exercise was a continuation of the successful transportation support operations 
conducted in FY91, FY92 and FY93. The primary mission was to provide "realistic" training opportunities for 
RC units doing their mobilization missions and tasks during peace time. Additionally, the Army benefits from 
the RC units moving "cargo" which they would otherwise transport via commercial carriers. 

GOLDEN CARGO 94 consisted of two missions. The Eastern Mission ran from 28 May through 1 July. 
It moved 4,382 short tons of Class V from Pueblo Army Depot Activity to McAlester Army Ammunition Plant 
(369 trailer loads). The Western Mission ran from 18 June through 1 July. It moved 1,359 short tons of inert 
rocket launchers from Umatilla Army Depot Activity to Sierra Army Depot (240 trailer loads). 

The 319th Transportation Brigade, the RC Command and Control Headquarters, coordinated the scheduling 
of RC units participating in the exercise. Types of RC units supporting GOLDEN CARGO 94 included the 


Resource Management AMCSA-AR 

following: Headquarters, Corps Support Command (COSCOM), Engineer, Medical, Military Police, 
Transportation, Ordnance, Maintenance, and Quartermaster. 

The ammunition transportation and handling required technical skills and doctrinally correct command and 
control to achieve maximum training benefits. The RC soldiers and leaders participating in GOLDEN CARGO 
exercises met the transportation safety challenges. It had an outstanding safety record during the FY91, FY92, 
FY93 and FY94 operations. 

Exercise GOLDEN SUPPORT 95 will have future RC transportation support exercises, moving supplies 
and stocks between AMC activities. The command and control headquarters will be the 19th Theater Army Area 
Command (TAACOM) from Des Moines, Iowa. 


GOLDEN SUPPORT 95 is a real world training exercise for Reserve Component Combat Service Support 
(CSS) units. They will conduct Mission Essential Training in staff planning, ammunition line-haul, warehousing, 
maintenance, and other Combat Service Support missions. 

The 19th Theater Army Area Command (TAACOM) was selected as the command and control headquarters. 
It assumed responsibility for planning and executing the Golden Support mission for FY95. Types of units 
supporting this exercise include the following: Transportation, Ordnance, Maintenance, Military Police, Medical, 
and Quartermaster. 

GOLDEN SUPPORT 95's mission is to move selected ammunition and supplies from various ammunition 
plants and depots to designated sites. The planners will determine the exact missions by 1 October 1994. 

The training value of this exercises lies in the following areas: 

• Command and control (planning and operations). 

• Maintenance / supply skills. 

• Transportation (loading, documentation, and movement control). 

• Environmental awareness and coordination 

• Safety (hazardous materiel handling and heavy equipment operations). 

REEF-EX 94 Economical Cost Analysis (Estimates) 

REEF-EX 94 is a prototype training exercise to place 100 tanks into artificial reef sites off Mobile Alabama. 
The current "scrap" metal contract has the contractor pay the US Government $2,500.00 per tank. The 
preparation costs to the U.S. Government are $500.00 per tank paid by TACOM to DLA. Preparation by USAR 
eliminates $500 cost. The cost per tank is the following: 

• Rail cost $1200 

Barge, crane, and tug $1000 
Personnel on Annual Training 


Resource Management AMCSA-AR 

The estimated artificial reef values vary between a low estimate of $218 million and a high of $7.3 billion. 
The training value of this exercises lies in the following areas: 

• Command and control (planning and operations). 

• Phase I preparation (maintenance / supply skills). 

• Phase II transportation (rail loading, blocking / bracing, and movement control). 

• Phase in port operations (stevedores). 

• Phase IV sea operations (crane, barge, and tug operations). 

The Army also receives other benefits from this program. It is a Military-Civil Cooperative Program. The 
Joint Services are working together. It increases environmental awareness and coordination and is an opportunity 
for training in hazardous materiel handling and heavy equipment operations. The operation resulted in increased 
visibility for DOD elements involved in supporting this exercise. For REEF-EX 95, the Army expects the states 
to pay the transportation cost. 

REEF-EX 95 (Florida) 

REEF-EX 94 was a very successful prototype operation. It established the feasibility of "Preparing and 
transporting obsolete tanks from Anniston Army Depot to selected ports, for sea movement to off-shore artificial 
reef sites." The Defense Department's Office of Civil-Military Cooperation provided initial funding to HQ AMC 
as the Executive Agent for REEF-EX. 

HQDA (DAMO-ODO) approved plan for FY95: "Army Materiel Command will prepare and transport 
approximately 1 ,000 excess tanks from selected Army Depots to designated CONUS seaports, for sea movement 
to off-shore artificial reef sites by 30 September 1995. Develop plans and coordinate funding for the continuation 
of this mission in Fiscal Years 1996-1999." 

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Marine Resources, has provided funding. 
The funding is in grants: $25,000 to Martin County on the east coast, and $50,000 each to Sarasota and 
Hernando Counties on the west coast. These funds will off-set transportation coasts associated with the Florida 
portion of REEF-EX 95. 

Current plans are to place 50 tanks into the designated artificial reefs off the three Florida counties in 
December 1994. Presently, 25 tanks have been prepared at Anniston Army Depot. They are ready for inspection 
by the EPA, Coast Guard, Corps of Engineers, and Florida Marine Resources Personnel. The remaining 25 tanks 
will be ready by 15 November 1994. 

The New Jersey National Guard (NJNG) received another ten tanks from Anniston Army Depot. These tanks 
are part of a pilot program. It will determine whether the NJNG can prepare these tanks at Fort Dix for 
deployment to New England states. The EPA, Coast Guard, and Corps of Engineers will inspect these tanks 
before movement to reef sites. 

Pine Bluff Arsenal (PBA) Reserve Component Training Mission 

PBA provides personnel, facilities, supplies, and equipment to support NBC training for RC soldiers and 
other RC training missions. PBA initially developed a 40-hour NBC sustainment training course. The course 


Resource Management AMCSA-AR 

serves as a refresher course for RC soldiers who have completed the two-week NBC Officer / NCO course. This 
course is unique because PBA is the only CONUS installation to offer this course to RC soldiers. 

In 1989, Pine Bluff Arsenal established the Reserve Component Support (RCS) Office. It oversees all RC 
programs and related administrative support functions. In 1991, the addition of an 80-hour NBC Defense Officer 
/ NCO Course expanded RC training. They conduct this course according to AR 350-41 and use the approved 
Program of Instruction from the U.S. Army Chemical School. Upon completion, this course qualifies Officers 
and NCOs to preform NBC responsibilities and duties at their RC units. During FY94, 180 Officers and NCOs 
graduated from the PBA formal training courses. 

They project RC training man-days (one soldier for one day equal one man-day) to increase from 2,346 
(FY94) to 3,612 (FY95). The PBA NBC courses and RC training support missions fill a critical role. They 
maintain RC unit and soldier readiness through formal courses and hands-on sustainment training. 

High Tech Regional Training Site - Maintenance (HTRTS- M). Tobyhanna Army Depot 

AMC received a formal RC training support mission from HQDA (DAMO) in 1986. HQDA supplied AGR 
instructors and MDEP funding (OMAR) for the High Tech Regional Training Site-Maintenance (HTRTS-M), 
at Tobyhanna Army Depot. The HTRTS-M supports RC repair training on communications and electronic 
equipment. This is otherwise available only to RC soldiers during initial skill training (IADT) at TRADOC 

The primary focus for the HTRTS-M training has been to provide hands-on training opportunities on modern 
equipment for RC maintenance units. It also has been to provide Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 
producing courses using TRADOC approved Programs of Instruction (POIs). This type of formal training and 
enhancement / sustainment (GS level) training support is not available at other locations. 

The ATTRS (Army Training Requirements and Military Occupational Specialties 

_ _, „ , , , „„„?,. , r-.m, 2 9E Radio Repairer 

Resources System) (School Code 923) llStS the FY94 2 9J Telecommunications Device Repairer 

HTRTS-M Formal MOS Producing Course Schedule 29N Switching Systems Repairer 

for MOS 29E, 29J, 29V and 52D. Sustainment ■* ^Z^ZX'^' 9 "*" 

training programs for individual tasks taken from the 33T Electronic Warfare Tactical Systems Repairer 

SOldierS manual for MOS 29E, 29J, 29N, 29V, 31C, "? ^Generation- Equipment Repairer 

68L Avionic Communications Equipment Repairer 
33T, 52D, 68L, 68Q, 68R, 76P, and 76V are presently 68Q Avionic Flight Systems Repairer 

available. Additional maintenance MOS can be 68R Avionic Radar Repairer 

... ,. _._. . ,. . 76P Repair Parts Specialist 

included, pending RC unit coordination. 76v Warehouse specialist 

RC units maintain critical soldier skills by doing tasks and operating or repairing equipment at TOAD. RC 
units receiving new equipment also receive valuable hands-on familiarization training at TOAD besides the 
formal class room training. Using the POIs for maintenance MOS training encourages RC units to send their 
soldiers to TOAD. 


Resource Management 



Organization and Key Personnel 

Manpower authorizations changed slightly during 
FY94. The Secretary position was elevated from 
Grade 07 to Grade 08. Two personnel changes took 
place: CH (MAJ) Sherrill F. Munn replaced CH 
(LTC) Paul I. Pease as Director of Personnel, 
Mobilization and DESCOM (U.S. Army Depot 

Position / Title 


Command Chaplain 
Dir, Pers. & Mobilization/ 
(DESCOM Staff Chaplain) 
Dir, Operations, Resource 
Management, Training, & Logistics 
Chaplain's Assistant Specialist 

(COL) Gerald M.Mangham 
CH (LTC) Paul I. Pease 

CH (LTC) Benjamin C. Manning 

SFC Wayne F. Ice 
Ann J. Jurczuk 

Support Command) Chaplain on 5 July 1994 and SFC Wayne F. Ice retired on 30 June 1994. Chaplain Munn 
came from student status at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth. SFC Ice was replaced 
on 29 August 1994 by SFC Raymond M. Beverage, who came from a position on Staff and Faculty, U.S. Army 
Chaplain Center and School, Fort Monmouth. 1 

Functions within the Command Chaplain's Office shifted as new personnel arrived. Chaplain Manning 
became Director of Operations, Resource Management, and Logistics and the leader of AMC's Chaplain Crisis 
Response Team. The DESCOM Staff Chaplain Position went away with the emergence of the Industrial 
Operations Command. Chaplain Munn became the Director of Personnel, Training and Mobilization and 
continued in the positions role as coordinator between the ministry and the Headquarters. (The latter is not a 
function of this office in accordance with AMC-R 10-2, Headquarters AMC, Mission and Functions [Command 
Chaplain]). In addition to being solely concerned with enlisted issues, SFC Beverage's functions were expanded 
to include office administration, supervision of the secretary, coordinating resource management and training for 
the Office of the Command Chaplain. 

Managing Ecclesiastical Logistics for the Army 

The Command Chaplain requested and was granted Chief of Staff approval to begin a profound study of the 
AMC Command Chaplain's (Director of Logistics) role as logistician for chaplain / religious items for the Army 
Chief of Chaplains. The Chaplain's Office should manage the defense acquisition program for the Chaplain 
Branch's unique ecclesiastical items. In short, AMCCH's role to the Chief of Chaplains should be the same as 
our Commanding General's role to the Chief of Staff, Army. The AMC Command Chaplain's office has 
increasingly taken a greater managerial role in the whole acquisition process for the Army Chaplaincy. Some of 
the ongoing religious logistics issues with which this office assisted includes: continuing development of the 
Chaplain Combat Kit (Christian) and the Chaplain Combat Kit (Jewish). AMCCH was tasked to complete 
several important tasks related to the fielding of the Multi-Faith Meals (Meals Ready-to-eat for Jews, Muslims 
and those with religious dietary requirements). The Chaplain's Office became involved in a new initiative with 
the Marine Corps Chaplaincy for a Mount-Out Box, to contain 90 days ecclesiastical supplies for deployment. 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the FY94 AMCCH Historical 


Resource Management AMCCH 

Logistics Advisory Group. Armed Forces Chaplain's Board 

On 16 November 1994 Chaplain (LTC) Benjamin C. Manning was appointed as a member of the Armed 
Forces Chaplain's Board's (AFCB) Logistics Advisory Group (LAG). The AFCB operates under the direction 
of the Under Secretary of Defense. The LAG consists of key Chaplain Logisticians from each of the Services. 
It's role is to advise the chairman of the AFCB on "joint" issues regarding logistics. During the course of the year 
the LAG has moved from solely advisory to that of initiating and implementing actions. An example of this is 
with the Multi-Faith Meals project. In addition, on 30 August 1994 Major General, Chaplain, Donald J. Harlin, 
US AF, appointed Chaplain Manning to chair an Information Management Task Force. 

Inspector General's System Inspection of Quality of Life and Report Sites 

The Command Chaplain appointed Chaplain (LTC) Benjamin C. Manning, as Director of Operations, to 
assist the AMC Inspector General's Systemic Inspection Team in a quality of life assessment for remote sites. 
Chaplain Manning became a member of the four person team that visited remote sites throughout the command. 
The Chaplain's portion of the report will be published separately to both the Army Chief of Chaplains and as a 
resource to Unit Ministry Teams in the Command. A shorter version will be included, when published, in the 
AMC Inspector General's formal report. 

Stress Busters 

The Command Chaplain, in response to awareness of high levels of stress both in the command and the 
headquarters, initiated a monthly Stress Busters Program. The Chief of Staff approved the Chaplain's 
management of this monthly event and the enlistment of each DCS and Separate Office to take responsibility and 
ownership for one of the months. Programs are designed to allow the workforce a break, to have fun, socialize, 
laugh, and build a sense of community. This was initiated during the last quarter of the fiscal year and saw 
programs such as: a Barbershop Quartet, a Gospel Music Group, and an in-house Talent Show. The Command 
Chaplain funds these events through the Non-appropriated Chaplain's Fund. 


Resource Management AMCCC 


Organization and Key Personnel 

The Office of the Command Counsel serves as the ^^ Position 

, , , . , _, ,. _ i * Mr. Edward J. Korte Command Counsel 

legal advisor to the Commanding General, Army Mr Robert B McFarlane Deputy command Counsel 

Materiel Command and to his Staff. The Office also COL William V. Adams Deputy Command Counsel / SJA 

serves as the prineipal legal advisor .0 the AMC £™~ SKS.U.G™, 

Subordinate commands, installations, and field activities Mr. Richard A. Couch Chief, Protest Litigation Group 

in the areas of law and patents. The Office is divided Mr - Ste P hen A Klatskv Chief - General ^ Division 

. Mr. Saul Elbaum Chief, Intellectual Property Law Division 

into two divisions, Procurement Law and General Law. 

The Command Counsel, Mr. Edward J. Korte, has held that position since December 1987. At the end of FY94 

the office was authorized a total of 24 civilians and 5 military spaces. 1 

Rwanda Relief Effort 

During the period 27 July - 12 August 1994, Major Larry Longbottom, U.S. Army Communications- 
Electronics Command Legal Office participated in "Operation Provide Hope" in Mombassa, Kenya. 

AMC Pamphlet 715-3. Volume 4 

The Past Performance in Source Selection guide was prepared to assist us in the evaluation of contractors 
past performance during the source selection process. 

For many years, the U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC) acquisition community has recognized that the 
quality of a contractor's performance on previous contracts should be an evaluation factor in most of our 
competitively negotiated acquisitions. To fully realize the advantages of evaluating past performance, it is 
essential that AMCCC considers not only performance information that potential contractors may include in their 
proposals, but also information obtained from other sources. Uniform AMC procedures for obtaining and 
evaluating past performance information have been developed and successfully implemented. This guide is a 
result of the Performance Risk Assessment Group (PRAG) Committee who were responsible for its development 
and implementation. The guide was distributed in November 1993. 

AMC Command Legal Program - 1994 - 1995 

The U.S. Army Materiel Command Command Legal Program — 1994-1995 constituted the "blueprint" for 
all AMC legal offices' efforts to continue implementing the total quality management philosophy. The goal of 
being "the best law firm in Government" has not changed. The Program outlines a comprehensive guide of legal 
support and review to the Army Materiel Command. 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the FY94 AMCCC Historical 


Resource Management AMCCC 

The 1994 - 1995 Strategic Plan for the AMC Legal Organization 

The Office of Command Counsel developed the 1994-1995 Strategic Plan for the AMC Legal Organization. 
The plan attempts to project events and circumstances that will shape the legal operational environment for the 
next 5 years. The AMC Legal community will construct its future Command Legal Program according to the 


Resource Management AMCCA 


Organization and Key Personnel 

During FY94, the Computer-Aided Acquisition and Logistic Support (CALS) Requirements Integration 
Office continued to serve as the AMC focal point and Army functional proponent agent for CALS requirements. 
The office supported the AMC Commander on CALS during three Joint Logistic Commanders 
Meetings — February 1 994 at STRICOM, Orlando, Florida; June 1 994 at Amphibious Fleet Training Center, 
Dam Neck, Virginia; and by videoconference in September 1994. 1 

The office consisted of the Chief, Mr. Richard Callan, two logistics management specialists, a secretary, and 
a computer specialist from the Integrated Procurement Systems Office (AMCAQ-I). Additionally, from 27 
November 1993 through 3 April 1994, the three engineers previously detailed from the DCS for Acquisition were 
permanently transferred to the CALS Office. An additional engineer, returning from Long-term training, was 
also assigned from the DCS for Acquisition to the CALS Office at this time. This action increased the total 
strength of the office from four to eight. 

Physical Reorganization 

The CALS Office made a physical move in November 1993 from Room 4S44 to Room 4C20 in the HQ 
AMC Building, to provide a more suitable space for office operations. Improved Office ADP (Automated Data 
Processing) equipment (486 PCs) were delivered during FY94 to replace aging Zenith 286 model PCs. On 3 
April 1994, all four engineers were reassigned to the DCS for Research, Development and Engineering to fill 
several authorized vacancies created by early-out departure. This Civilian Personnel Office-directed action left 
the CALS Office at 50 percent of its strength during the August 1993 through April 1994 time period. The 
mission of the office remained unchanged. 

Joint Technical Coordinating Groups-Integrated Product Data Environment 

The office assisted in merging the Joint Technical Coordinating Groups (JTCG) for CALS and Flexible 
Computer Integrated Manufacturing (FCIM) into the JTCG-Integrated Product Data Environment (IPDE). The 
Joint Logistic Commanders approved and signed a charter for the new group at their meeting on 15 September 
1994 in Tellahoma, Tennessee. Mr. Michael Sandusky is the Army principal member of the JTCG-IPDE. 

Electronic Commerce / Electronic Data Interchange (EC / EDI) 

In the EC / EDI arena, the office monitored the continued growth of activity in the AMC MSCs, particularly 
in TACOM and Tobyhanna Army Depot, highlighted by the increased use of Electronic Bulletin Boards and other 
demonstration projects. AMCCOM is serving as the lead command for efforts to standardize the Boards, 
requiring them to have common data elements and screen presentations. 

1 Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the FY94 AMCCA Historical 


Resource Management AMCCA 

Contract Data Requirements List 

Based on issues raised at the Atlanta XX Conference held in April 1994 between the Army and key industry 
leaders, the office initiated policy correspondence for HQDA which strongly recommended the delivery of single 
copies of Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) deliverables from contractors to government acquiring 
activities. This action, when implemented, will reduce some of the burden on contractors for delivery of paper 
documentation associated with the acquisition process. 

Digitizing AMC 

The office supported the Digitizing AMC initiative by participating in the Information Technology Task 
Force working sessions. The office continued to support the Washington Area EDI Users Group. It also 
provided participation in the Flexible Computer Integrated Manufacturing (FCIM) Electronic Integrated Program 
Management by bringing EC / EDI expertise to the table. 

Joint Computer- Aided Acquisition and Logistics Support (JCALS) 

This year saw the creation of several groups for identifying additional functional area requirements which 
could be satisfied by the JCALS infrastructure. The Joint Configuration Management Council (JCMC), 
comprised of members from each Component at the 06\GM-15 level, provided management and direction for 
the individual teams. Joint Functional Requirements Determination Teams (JFRDTs) for special focus areas such 
as Logistics Support, Acquisition Management, Corrective Enhancement / Engineering and others were created 
to identify and define user needs. Then the teams would develop a Mission Need Statement, abbreviated 
functional descriptions, abbreviated functional economic analysis, and a memorandum of agreement with the 
respective DOD Principal Staff Assistant on how to implement these requirements through a Program Manager. 
The respective PMs would be identified with the assistance of the Defense Information Systems Agency (DIS A). 

The role of the CALS Requirements Integration Office was to find the "subject matter expert" within the 
Army for each focus area and to orchestrate Army membership on the JFRDTs. By the close of the fiscal year, 
the teams addressing Logistics Support and Corrective Enhancement / Engineering had completed a first draft 
of the needed documentation. 

The JCALS contract with Computer Sciences Corporation continued throughout the fiscal year. The 
contractor completed development work on the first portion, and began design work on the second portion, of the 
Technical Manual functionality. The development prototype sites which had been established in each of the 
Services (Redstone Arsenal in the Army), provided valuable user feedback to the contractor during the 
development of program software. The next major milestone for the program is the deployment decision, Major 
Automated Information System Review Council (MAISRC) m, which is scheduled for October 1995. This office 
provided Army representation for JCALS program events, and working members to the various work groups of 
the project manager Test Integration Work Group, ILS Management Team, Deployment Work Group, Human 
Systems Integration Working Group, and Training Work Group. 


Resource Management AMCLL 



The Congressional Liaison Office (AMCLL) serves as the principal point of congressional contact for the 
U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMC). The Congressional Liaison Office manages and coordinates relations 
with Congress. This mission is conducted by providing direction for prompt and comprehensive responses to 
White House and congressional inquiries. The office maintains cognizance for the Commanding General, AMC, 
on all significant legislative developments affecting command operations. Top AMC management is informed 
of all White House and congressional inquiries that are likely to develop into major issues. AMCLL maintains 
close liaison with the Department of Army, Chief of Congressional Liaison.' 

Organization and Personnel 

The AMC Congressional Liaison Office has one Chief, Congressional Liaison Office 

,-..«• .. ~n ...„, Colonel David H. Longley Feb 1993 - Present 

military and five Civilian positions. The AMC Congressional Liaison Specialists 

Congressional Liaison Office lost a long time Mr. John Bendontis Apr 1989 -Jan 1994 

, .. r, , ... 1 j c t M-r» a / Ms. Jonah Gulledge Feb 1992 - Present 

employee. Mr. Bendontis took advantage of VERA/ Ms Jean Tumer Apr 1994 . p^, 

VSIP (Voluntary Early Retirement Authority/ Ms. Sharon Henson Jun 1986 - Present 

Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay) in January 1994. M$ m QaM ^^ Feb ^ ^ 

AMCLL was fully Staffed during FY94 except for Correspondence Clerk 

February and March 1994 when Mr. Bendoritis' Mr - Michael McPnerson Feb 1991- Present 

position was empty. 

Formal Inquiries 

In FY94, AMCLL responded to approximately 630 formal inquiries, including such issues as personnel, 
reorganization, contracts and depot maintenance. Many informal inquiries are addressed on an almost daily basis 
and covers a wide range of topics. 

FY94 Congressional Hearing Cycle 

The CG testifies before two congressional subcommittees annually and at other times as required. The 
Congressional Task Force researches, writes and edits the congressional testimony for the CG. For the first time, 
the task force was conducted under the lead of AMCLL. The toughest period was when General Leon Salomon 
took the Commanding General position as the congressional hearing cycle was beginning. Previously, these 
testimonies were weeks or months apart. This year it was particularly involved since the testimonies were 
conducted back to back on 12 and 13 April 1994. The hearings went smoothly and the testimonies were well 
received. General Salomon honored the task force members with AMC 4-Star Coins. 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the Congressional Liaison Office 
historical submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCLL 

Congressional Affairs Contact Officers (CACO) Training 

Each Major Subordinate Command (MSC) has a congressional point of contact that AMCLL works within 
the process of answering congressional inquiries. AMCLL held its first Congressional Affairs Contact Officers 
(CACOs) training on 7-8 February 1994. The group included CACOs from AMCCOM, ARDEC, ARL, 
ATCOM, CECOM, DESCOM and TACOM. An introduction and update were provided to the CACOs by 
AMCLL personnel. The CACO attended a DA-sponsored training class: "A Briefing on the 103rd Congress, 
2nd Session." They also visited Capitol Hill to meet with a congressional staffer. This was the first AMC CACO 
meeting ever held and AMCLL plans to make this an annual event. The CACOs obtained much information and 
insight into how AMCLL conducts business. They also had the opportunity to discuss how other CACOs handle 

Congressional Visits 

GEN Salomon, GEN Ross (former CG), LTG Coburn and other top management staff made many visits to 
Capitol Hill in FY94. In March 1994, professional staff members from the House and Senate Armed Services 
Committees were invited to AMC for briefings. These briefings are held yearly in preparation of the upcoming 

Savings Bonds Campaign 

AMCLL was responsible for the U.S. Army headquarters 

. , _ , , _*L . _ . _ . J Congressional Liaison Office (AMCLL) 67% 

Materiel Command 1 994 Savings Bonds campaign. Specia i Analysis Office (AMCSO) 57% 

The program was conducted 1-30 June 1994. The Office of the Deputy Commanding General (AMCDCG) 57% 


theme for this year's campaign was "Secure Your sunflower Army Ammunition Plant (SFAAP) 88% 

Future, Today." Last year the participation rate U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center & School (USADACS) 55% 

increased to 34 percent from the previous 33 percent ^^ZI^o^maap, lit 

rate. Due to Command RIFs (Reductions in Force) U.S. Army Security Assistance Command (USASAQ 50% 

and VERA / VSIP the percentage was adjusted to 27 

percent for last year. The participation this year increased to 29 percent, an increase of 2 percent. Several offices 

achieved a participation rate of 50 percent or more and were presented with a National Honor Roll Award. 


Resource Management AMCEE 


Organization and Key Personnel 

The mission of the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) is to manage a full-spectrum command program of 
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) for civilians which establishes a representative work force by removing 
barriers and maximizing work force potential, creating a work environment free of discrimination through 
communication of issues which impact specific groups, recognizing management performance, and ensuring 
compliance with governing EEO statutes and regulations through program oversight and evaluation. 1 

During FY94, the AMCEE staffing authorization increased from nine to ten. A Secretary, GS-07 position 
was established and Ms. Ping Steier was hired in August 1994. Ms. Consuelo Roberts transferred to the DCS 
for Personnel and Ms. Laura MacNeil (an overhire) was permanently assigned to the office. Ms. Norma Gibbons, 
an EEO Intern, was reassigned from Fort Belvoir Research, Development and Engineering Center to the office 
for training. 

Equal Employment Opportunity Workshops 

In May 1994, the annual AMC Equal Employment Opportunity Workshop was held in St. Louis, MO, from 
15-20 May 1994. During the workshop, participants discussed and outlined program goals and objectives for 
FY95. The Quality Action Council continued to facilitate the goals and objectives identified by the workshop 
participants for the command. 

EEO Training Program / Meeting 

Staff members assisted in providing training at HQ AMC and subordinate activities in the areas of equal 
employment opportunity, affirmative employment and prevention of sexual harassment. Ms. Scarbrough made 
presentations at commanders conferences and to the Assistant Secretary of Army for Manpower and Reserve 

During the fiscal year, training in work force diversity was provided to senior level management officials. 
Three staff members participated in long-term training programs (Ms. Conseulo Roberts, Ms. Barbara Earnest 
and Ms. Carole Page). Ms. Kathy Robinson graduated from the EEO Intern program. 

AMCEE Employees and EEO careerists from the major subordinate commands and subordinate activities 
participated in a PERSCOM-sponsored human resources management process modeling effort sponsored by 
PERSCOM. The purpose of this undertaking was to review EEO and civilian personnel processes with a view 
to simplifying and / or reinventing them; identifying business improvements; and identifying non-value-added 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the Equal Opportunity Office's 
Historical Submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCEE 

Ms. Shirley A. Cason, Complaints Program Manager, served on a DOD Task Force to work on the Army's 
effort to study and institute the types of initiatives recommended in Vice President Gore's National Performance 
Review. Ms. Cason was also detailed to HQDA to finalize the new AR on discrimination complaints processing. 

The AMC Office of Equal Opportunity was one of only a few of federal government EEO offices which a 
representative of the Panama Canal Commission chose to visit in order to develop ideas for their program. Their 
representative met with the Director and some of the staff members to discuss requirements for an effective EEO 
program, complaints processing, and affirmative employment. 

Complaint Processing 

A compilation of EEOC decisions on appeals of final agency decisions was distributed to AMC EEO offices. 
The compilation, assembled after extensive review of published EEO Commission and Federal and District court 
decisions in EEO cases. Its purpose is to help EEO officers fashion dismissal decisions on the agency's behalf 
that stand challenge on appeal. 

Within HQ AMC, three new EEO Counselors were appointed by letter orders. Monthly meetings continue 
to be held to keep counselors abreast of current regulatory requirements. 

Affirmative Employment Program 

During FY94, the first EEO program newsletter was designed and published, tided Kaleidoscope, The EEO 
Diversity Digest. The newsletter will facilitate communication in the EEO Community. 

U.S. Army Materiel Command 

As of 30 September 1994, a total of 69,908 employees were employed in the work force. This represents 
a decrease of 4,729 employees from the 30 September 1993 total (74,637). 

• Whites represented 8 1 .03 percent (56,65 1 ) of the employees in the work force; of these 39,045 (55 .8%) were 
men and 17,606 (25.2 percent) were women. This represents a 0.2 percent decrease from 30 September 1993. 

• Blacks represented 9.5 percent (6,579) of the employees in the work force; of these 3,597 (5.2 percent) were 
men and 2,982 (4.3 percent) were women. There was no change in representation for Black. 

• Hispanics represented 6.2 percent (4,297) of the employees in the work force; of these 3,412 (4.9 percent) 
were men and 885 (1 .3 percent) were women. This represents a 0.1 percent increase over 30 September 1993. 

• Asians represented 2. 1 percent ( 1 ,453) of the employees in the work force; of these 1 , 1 90 1 .7 percent were 
men and 263 (0.4 percent) were women. This represents a 0.1 percent increase over 30 September 1993. 

• American Indians represented 1 .4 percent (928) of the employees in the work force; of these 602 (0.9 
percent) were men and 326 (0.5 percent) were women. This represents a 0.1 percent increase over 30 September 


Resource Management AMCEE 

HO Army Materiel Command (HO AMC) 

As of 30 September 1994, a total of 874 employees were employed in HQ AMC work force. This represents 
a decrease of 88 employees from the 30 September 1993 total (962). 

• Whites represented 79.3 percent (693) of the employees in the work force; of these 380 (43.5 percent) were 
men and 313 (35.8 percent) were women. This represents a 0.9 percent decrease from 30 September 1993. 

• Blacks represented 1 6.7 percent (1 46) of the employees in the work force; of these 46 (5.3 percent) were men 
and 100 (1 1 .4 percent) were women. This represents a 0.9 percent increase over 30 September 1993. 

• Hispanics represented 1 .8 percent (1 6) of the employees in the work force; of these 8 (0.9 percent) were men 
and 8 (0.9 percent) were women. This represents a 0.3 percent decrease from 30 September 1993. 

• Asians represented 1 .6 percent (14) of the employees in the work force; of these 7 (0.8 percent) were men 
and 7 (0.8 percent) were women. This represents a 0.2 percent increase over 30 September 1993. 

• American Indians represented 0.6 percent (5) of the employees in the work force; of these 5 (0.6 percent) 
were men and there were no women. This represents a 0.1 percent increase over 30 September 1993. 




Resource Management AMCIG & AMXIG 



Organization and Manpower 

The mission of the AMC Inspector General (IG) 

and AMC Inspector General Activity was the following: Key Personnel in the Office and Activity 

to look into and report to the Commanding General g^jn£o U ff(Jui93-Jun94) 
upon matters that pertained to the performance of Colonel John c. Rickman (Jul 94 -) 
mission and the state of discipline, efficiency, economy, Chief, investi g ations and Assistance 

, . . , ..*... Colonel John C. Rickman (Jul 93 - Jul 94) 

morale, training and readiness within AMC; coordinate ltc Julius m. Young (Jul 94 -) 
IG activities throughout AMC; and do Other duties as Chief, Inspections and Support Division 
... , ,. ,. .... Ms. BiilieM. Labhart.GM-15 (Jan90-) 

are required by law and regulations or as directed by the 

Commanding General. The AMC Inspector General Authorized On Board 

was dual-hatted: he served as the Inspector General on % g ; n 9 7 8 ^ Be $™ g ™ A 

the headquarters AMC staff and as the Chief of the Military Rank 

AMCIG Activity that was a separate reporting activity. COL 2221 

Authorized and on-board personnel for the Office of the maj 

IG and the IG Activity in FY94 were as listed. 1 cpt 

ENL 3 3 3 3 

TOTAL 17 13 9 10 

Seven civilian and two military authorizations were 

lost in the Inspections and Support Division. Two ^jjj'J" Rank j , 

military positions were lost in the Investigations and gs/gmi4 7 6 5 5 

Assistance Division. These losses were the result of the GS13 21 15 " 9 

C ^ 1 1 I 1 

Army and AMC downsizing and the DOD hiring freeze, gs n 3 3 3 3 

One inspector retired under the VERA / VSIP. Since other 8 8 6 6 

AMXIG was unable to hire, the Budget Officer was T0TAL 41 34 27 25 

transferred to an inspector trainee position. Her duties grand total 58 47 49 35 

were therefore delegated to other personnel causing the Activity to curtail activities in many areas. 

A few military IG positions were unfilled during part of FY94. Since DAIG only permits civilians to do 
certain IG functions, the Activity had to provide additional support to those MSCs. The Activity also continued 
to provide IG support to those MSCs who are not authorized an IG (USASAC, STRICOM and CBDCOM). 

The Chief of Staff approved a Quick Reaction Assessment (QRA) capability. QRAs provide fast results on 
limited-scope issues. They will be conducted besides Systemic Inspections. An overview of the AMC IG 
inspection process was provided for two Saudi Arabian IGs at the request of the DAIG. 

The IG and the Activity continued their various oversight and information sharing programs. Video 
conferences were conducted with MSC IGs to provide a timely forum for sharing mutual problems, concerns and 
solutions. The "IG TIPS" was published by the Activity to provide IG historical information and articles of 

'Unless otherwise noted, information in this section was taken from the AMXIG Historical Submission for 


Resource Management AMCIG & AMXIG 

interest and general value command-wide. It included problem areas, practical tips and scheduled IG activities. 
Monthly IG Helpful Information TopicS (HINTS) were also distributed throughout AMC via the HQ Monthly 
Bulletin and the IG TIPS. These HINTS are brief synopses concerning regulatory and statutory information of 
interest and concern to all employees. They are to help personnel avoid problem situations by informing them 
of requirements they may have forgotten or never known. 


Assistance Visit and Soldier Support Program. The program resumed operation in January 1994. It was 
suspended in May 1993 due to personnel shortages within the Investigations and Assistance Division. The 
Soldier Support Program is conducted on a cyclic schedule, while Assistance Visits are only available upon 

The Assistance Program continued to help commanders, soldiers, civilian employees, and family members. 
Again, commanders at all levels expressed their appreciation for the candid responses provided during FY94. 
The program was initiated in FY87 and augmented with the Soldier Support Team in FY88. It provided AMC 
personnel and their families the opportunity to express concerns on a broad range of policies and programs. The 
Soldier Support portion of the Assistance Program evaluated unit training, personnel, administration, and quality 
of life. The Soldier Support Program also reviewed the quality of medical, dental and community service support 
provided to soldiers. 

The Activity provided immediate responses to commanders and directors, allowing them to correct actual 
and perceived organizational concerns. The program emphasized non-attribution and non-retribution, which 
fostered meaningful debate and honest information from all participants. A key element was to leave visit results 
/ issues at the lowest organizational level and not require a formal reply. This policy reduced the perception 
among commanders that the program was a threat to their operations. During FY94, AMC IG Assistance and 
Soldier Support Teams visited 24 organizations / activities at 19 locations. 

IG Trends. FY94 Inspector General Action Request data reflected a slight upturn in the number of 
assistance cases from FY93: 61 percent of the closed cases were in the assistance category and 39 percent were 
in the allegation category. Of a total of 512 allegations, 158 or 31 percent were proven. The top ten functional 
case categories were the following: Personal Conduct (24 percent), Civilian Personnel Management (20 percent), 
Finance and Accounting (10 percent), Military Organizations (9 percent), Command / Management of 
Organizations (8 percent), Acquisition (4 percent), Engineer / Facilities (4 percent), Community / Installation 
Support (4 percent), Health Care (3 percent), and Transportation (2 percent). 


The AMC Inspector General (IG) Activity conducted four types of inspections during FY94: Systemic, 
Quick Reaction Assessments (QRAs), Follow-up and Procurement. They also provided inspection coordination 
support for inspections of AMC by external agencies: Department of Defense (3 inspections) and Department 
of the Army (23 inspections). The following is a summary of those inspections conducted by the AMC IG 

Systemic Inspections and QRAs. The AMC IG Activity carried two systemic inspections over from FY93 
into FY94: Advanced Education of Military Personnel and Redistribution of Excess Class VII materiel. Final 


Resource Management AMCIG & AMXIG 

reports were completed on both in FY94. Two systemic inspections and one QRA began in FY94. The 
inspections were AMC Support to Remote Sites, and TDY Administration / Management. The QRA was 
Implementation of the Senior System under the Total Army Performance Evaluation System (TAPES). The Final 
Reports for these systemic inspections and the QRA were not completed by the end of the FY. They will be 
forthcoming during FY95. A narrative description of the completed inspections is provided below: 

• Advanced Education of Military Personnel. This inspection's focus was to learn the effectiveness of 
policies and procedures for reimbursement of soldiers pursuing advanced degrees. 

• Redistribution of Excess Class VII Materiel. The specific focus of this inspection was to evaluate the 
overall processes for. redistribution of excess class VII materiel; separation of unserviceable and / or excess class 
VII materiel from the Army inventory; type classification of items as obsolete; and demilitarization of class VII 

Follow-up Inspections. The AMC IG Activity conducted two systemic inspection followups (Army Ideas 
of Excellence Program and Low Density Systems) during FY94. These inspections were to see if corrective 
actions had been taken to resolve problems identified during the original inspections. 

Procurement Inspections. During FY94, the Procurement Inspection Team conducted inspections in the 
compliance mode. Eight procurement inspections were conducted covering the following areas: contract oversight 
and administration, task order contracting, acquisition of information resources, interservice support agreements, 
small purchases and the small business program, the Government Credit Card Program, and other topics used 
for ensuring that procurement offices were complying with applicable regulatory and statutory requirements. 

Overall, procurement activities were providing quality acquisition services and maintaining a commendable 
level of support to requiring activities. The following are some areas where deficiencies were identified: ( 1 ) 
Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) were deleted after the funding appropriation expired. The expired 
appropriation was later used to reinstate the CLINs; (2) Individual Contracting Actions Reports (DD Form 350) 
were not always submitted within three working days after obligation of funds on contract; (3) Government credit 
cards were not being fully used within the contracting offices to improve the efficiency of the small purchase 
process; (4) Contractors did work on government installations without Certificates of Insurance. This situation 
exposed the Government to unnecessary liability. 

Organizational Inspection Program (OIP) 

Emphasis was placed on the OIP AMC-wide during FY94. The OIP is the Commander's program. It is a 
management tool to measure the effectiveness of programs, functions and policies. The OIP also helps with the 
timely identification of problem areas. It integrates all inspections, audits and assistance visits into a 
comprehensive program. The IG Activity is the proponent for AMC-wide inspection policy and is the HQ OIP 
Manager. During FY94, the Chief of Staff tasked the Activity to evaluate redundancy and frequency of all HQ 
oversight visits. Each functional office reviewed all inspections, audits, and assistance visits to find what could 
be consolidated or reduced in frequency. This effort would be to reduce disruption in the field while still 
maintaining sufficient oversight. The IG Activity evaluated the results and made recommendations to the Chief 
of Staff. Several offices were tasked to brief him personally. The Activity maintained a consolidated schedule 
of all HQ inspections / visits. It was distributed throughout the HQ and the field for planning purposes. The IG 


Resource Management AMCIG & AMXIG 

Activity and other HQ functional offices were interviewed by the DAIG during their Army-wide Inspection of 
the OIP. DAIG's assessment was that the AMC IG had an excellent OIP, a model for other Army elements. 

Acting Inspector General (AIG) Course 

AMCIG conducted the annual AIG Course 14-15 September 1994 at Headquarters, AMC. The course 
indoctrinated AIGs in the tradition, organization and standards of the IG System and how IG assistance is 
provided. The Activity trained 15 students, 3 civilians and 12 military personnel. MG R.S. Siegfried, the Deputy 
DAIG, gave the opening remarks. MG Ray E. McCoy, AMC Chief of Staff, gave the closing remarks and issued 
certificates of completion. Subject matter experts from the DAIG Legal Office, AMC Command Counsel, Equal 
Opportunity Office and Management-Employee Relations Office also provided instruction. Course critique 
sheets contained favorable remarks, especially regarding instruction on separating the AIGs' staff role from AIG 
duties and responsibilities. AMXIG reduced training cost by upgrading last year's training materials and using 
the Lodging Success Program. 


Resource Management AMCIR 


Organization and Mission 

The Internal Review and Audit Compliance (IRAC) Office reports directly to the Chief of Staff. AMCIR 
was responsible for developing major policies, plans, and programs to conduct internal reviews throughout the 
Command. The office directed AMC nonappropriated fund audit activities, including the performance of audits 
and the disposition of audit reports. It serves as the AMC focal point for external audit agencies / offices. Such 
offices include the General Accounting Office (GAO), DOD Inspector General (DODIG), and U.S. Army Audit 
Agency (USAAA). The office also developed and issued major policies, procedures, and systems. These 
governed AMC actions related to audits and reviews by external agencies. They included the assignment of 
action responsibility and control of the Command reply process. The Internal Management Control staff 
maintained a framework for pinpointed responsibility and accountability to achieve Financial Managers' Integrity 
Act objectives. They distributed program guidance and requirements; provided training and assistance to 
managers; maintained records on assessable units and the status of reported weaknesses through correction. 1 


The IRAC Office began and ended FY94 with an authorized personnel level of eleven spaces, the same as 
the previous year. Leonard H. Maguire has been the Chief of IRAC since the fourth quarter of FY89. 

Command Management Issues 

AMC Commanders meet with the GAO. AMC Commanders, GEN Jimmy Ross and GEN Leon Salomon, 
met with GAO senior officials from the National Security International Affairs Division. They discussed audits, 
planned and ongoing, involving AMC. Also, the Commanders updated the GAO officials on DOD / Army and 
command initiatives. GEN Ross briefed AMC's RESHAPE Planning and Projections at the GAO headquarters. 
The briefing gave the auditors up-to-date information on the Command's structure and missions. GAO also met 
with GEN Salomon to discuss depot maintenance issues. Both had been asked to testify on it during 
Congressional hearings. 

AMC Commander meets with the Army Auditor General. This was GEN Salomon's first meeting with 
the Auditor General since taking command of AMC. Mr. Reardon discussed his agency's approach for their au-^ 
of financial operations at AMC. The audit was being conducted with the Chief Financial Officers' Act. GEN 
Salomon was encouraged to share any areas of concern that he would like the auditors to address. The Auditor 
General requested the Commander and his staffs support in carrying out their audit plan. 

Internal Reviews 

Contracting for Automation Support Services. The review was requested by the Assistant Chief of Staff. 
The objective of the review was to learn whether adequate controls existed in the administration of the contracts 
for automation services. 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the Office of Internal Review and 
Audit Compliance historical submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCIR 

AMCIR's review revealed that basic internal controls and Government surveillance were not in place. This 
meant there was no reasonable assurance that resources allocated to the contracts were effectively and efficiently 
managed. AMCIR found the cost of a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract was climbing year-after-year. DOIM (Director 
of Information Management) established no controls to ensure the Government was getting the best purchase for 
its dollars. HQ AMC paid another contractor an estimated $245,000 for preventive maintenance not performed. 
A third contractor improperly billed the Government. The contractor was paid more than $5,000 without 
challenge because the Contracting Officer Representative did not adequately administer the contract. During the 
survey phase, AMCIR issued a Quick Reaction Report to DOIM on unnecessary costs on a computer maintenance 

Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR) Self-sufficiency Exemption Program. The review was 
requested by the Director, Internal Review, HQDA as part of an Army-wide assessment of the program. The 
objectives of the review were to learn whether: (a) the FY93 nonappropriated fund expenditures were properly 
used, consistently applied, and meet the intent of the program; and (b) the FY94 request was justified, reasonable, 
and based on the ability to self-fund requirements. AMCIR's review concluded that the FY93 expenditures for 
HQ AMC were properly used and meet the intent of the program. Also, AMCIR determined that the FY94 
budget request for funds was justified and reasonable. It was based on the inability to fund MWR requirements 
with appropriated funds. 

Test Merger of Nonappropriated Funds at Blue Grass Army Depot. The review was requested by the 
HQ AMC Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel. The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense's Principal 
Director of Civilian Personnel Policy / EO needed to know the financial impact of merging the civilian and the 
military funds. Specifically, the review evaluated the appropriateness of the expenditures and to learn whether 
the funds retained their identities. AMCIR's review revealed that, except in two areas, expenditures were 
appropriate and lower in FY93 compared with FY92 expenditures. AMCIR also found the identities of the funds 
were maintained. The individual funds could be reconstituted in case of termination of the test. 

AMC's Commanding General Farewell Dinner. The review was requested by the HQ AMC Deputy Chief 
of Staff for Resource Management. The review was to decide the propriety and accountability of cash collections 
and disbursements associated with the farewell dinner. AMCIR issued an advisory report that showed that all 
cash collected and disbursed was accounted for effectively. 

U.S. Army Management Engineering College. AMCIR performed the review at the direction of the HQ 
AMC Chief of Staff. The HQ AMC Deputy Chief of Staff for Resource Management requested that the review 
be made. The objective of the review was to learn and validate the funding shortfall that AMEC would incur for 
FY94. Additionally, AMCIR was asked to decide the appropriateness of some expenditures. 

AMCIR's review showed that the funding shortfall depended on a decision on what AMEC can bill its 
customers for reimbursement. Dependent on what decision was made, the funding requirements for AMEC 
ranged from $8K to $7.3M. 

Additional Internal Reviews. Additional reviews performed during the period included the following: 

• Quarterly Fund Verifications of Class B Agent (operating funds) for the 1 st and 2nd quarters. A terminal 
audit of the Class B Agent (operating funds) was performed in the 3rd quarter. Also, a fund verification was 
made of the Class B Agent for the Intelligence Contingency Funds in the 4th quarter. 


Resource Management AMCIR 

• AMCIR also performed followup reviews on Internal Management Control Material Weaknesses and closed 
eight weaknesses reported on the Commander's Annual Assurance Statement for FY93 as having been 

• A followup review was performed on a U.S. Army Audit Agency and DA Inspector General review 
associated with a Special Access Program. 

Significant External Audit Reports 

DODIG Report, Materiel Retention and Disposal Procedures for Secondary Items. The auditors found 
that DOD components had taken aggressive action to reduce inactive and unrequired inventory. However, 
wholesale supply activities did not review and validate major segments of materiel categorized as potential 
reutilization and disposal materiel. Also, materiel was recouped from the disposal system when there was no 
requirement for the materiel. HQ AMC has issued guidance to AMC's MSCs that should help correct these 

DODIG Report, Billing of Depot Maintenance Transactions for Foreign Military Sales (FMS). 

DODIG reported that the Army and Air force did not accurately charge FMS customers for depot maintenance 
transactions. Also, the Navy did not have proper documentation to support FMS depot maintenance billings. 
The Army and Air Force lack a system to track accurately and validate all depot maintenance costs for FMS 
customers. The auditors considered this a material internal control weakness as defined by Public Law 97-255. 
The U.S. Army Security Assistance Command is developing a tracking system to correct deficiencies. 

Audit Alert Network 

The Audit Alert Network informed AMC activities of problems uncovered at one activity that could exist 
at other activities. During FY94 HQ AMC IRAC issued three Audit Alerts. Activities reported similar problems 
in the following areas: 

• Lack of internal controls over handling small arms repair parts leading to loss or theft of items. 

• Activities had not recorded fixed assets in their general ledger. 

• Fire departments facility response cards were neither current nor accurate. 

Semiannual Followup Status Reports FY94 

For FY94, AMCIR had 36 U.S. Army Audit Agency (US AAA) reports and 224 Internal Review reports that 
required management actions. Monetary benefits associated with those reports totaled $298.4 million and $40.7 
million, respectively. AMCIR saved $253.1 million by closing 19 USAAA reports and $ 7.2 million by closing 
1 69 Internal review reports. 

Internal Management Control Program 

AMCIR continued an aggressive training program with the primary objectives being to ensure that: Every 
manager understands the GAO Standards and how to apply them in daily operations. Operating managers 
understand their responsibilities for using the Internal Control Review Checklists for day-to-day guidance. They 
must also use them in periodic formal application required by the Management Control Plan. Presentations also 


Resource Management AMCIR 

explained the genesis of the Integrity Act and implementing requirements: to ensure everyone understands the 
basic requirements of the program, how it operates, and its practical benefits. 

With the publication of the Army's Management Control Plan, AMCIR ensured everyone was aware of 
available checklists and scheduled requirements. The office showed subordinate activities changes to Internal 
Control Review Checklists in the Army Management Control Plan for FY94 formal use. Changes and corrections 
of errors to the Management Control Plan were immediately provided to subordinate activities. 

On 31 August 1994, the DOD Comptroller conducted a field evaluation of the AMC administration of the 
management control process. The Chief, Internal Management Control Division, Directorate for Management 
Improvement, Office of the Comptroller, DOD provided a one-hour presentation. The presentation, to a group 
of HQ AMC managers and administrators, was on Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act initiatives by OSD. 
He also conducted a one-hour evaluation of AMC's use of internal management controls. The Internal 
Management Control Staff also did the following: provided responses to the FY93 Annual Assurance Statements 
(DOD, Army, and AMC) to the MSCs, SRAs and HQ AMC staff, and initiated additional oversight of field 
material weaknesses by providing the status of prior year weaknesses from feeder statement submissions to the 
appropriate staff offices. 

Training Requirements 

HQ AMC IRAC was responsible for coordinating USAAA training with HQDA and for allocating spaces 
to Command activities. The USAAA was a principal source of training courses for IRAC personnel. AMCIR 
developed an AMC-oriented training package on Internal Management Controls. It was distributed with the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management & Comptroller) training package to subordinate 
activities. To improve effectiveness, the training materials were provided in several graphics formats. AMCIR 
continued to provide policy, guidance and procedures through the electronic network to subordinate activities. 
More than thirty memoranda were sent to field activities. Also, provided specialized internal management 
control training to the CBDCOM Corporate Board concerning management controls. 


Resource Management AMCSF 


Organization and Mission 

The Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command (HQ AMC) Safety Office did not undergo any 
organizational changes during FY94. Its mission, to direct and oversee the Command Safety Program, was 
unchanged. Safety Program objectives were the following: provide maximum degree of safety, consistent with 
the operational requirements, in the design and use of materiel and equipment; prevent personnel injuries; prevent 
damage to public and private property; and prevent the interruption of operations. 1 


The Safety Office had authorization for and had FY94 Personnel 

i j • i '. a»,^, . .,. , ^ . Chief, Safety Office Mr. John E. Rankin 

on-board eight AMC civilians and one Department of secretary Ms. Sandra e. ciawson 

the Army (DA) Civilian safety intern. It had no Aviation Safety Mr. Loren L. Becker 

au.horiza.fonforn.iltoymanpo^r. The Safety Office g^XSE* £££,» 

did not experience any personnel changes during FY94. Radiation Safety Mr. John G. Manfre 

The staff members and their functional areas at the end Occupy Safety Mr.aydeL.McCorkie 

Explosives Safety Mr. Enc T. Olson 

Of FY94 are listed at the right. Safety Intern Ms. Stephanie Dickens 

AMC FY93 Annual Safety Report 

At the direction of the Commanding General (CG), the Safety Office compiled an FY93 Safety Report. This 
"state of the AMC Program" was a joint effort of the safety offices throughout the Command. They submitted 
accomplishments and initiatives in the following areas: radiation safety, explosives safety, chemical safety, 
system safety, occupational safety and aviation safety. It also included a section on program administration and 
accident statistics. The Executive Directors, and the Command Designated Safety and Occupational Health 
Official, contributed executive summaries for their areas of responsibilities. The Safety Office distributed the 
final report throughout AMC and DA as lessons learned after review and approval by the CG. 

AMC Designated Safety and Occupational Health Official 

General Salomon, as the Command Safety Officer, appointed MG McCoy as the AMC Designated Safety 
and Occupational Health Officer (DSOHO). Besides the DSOHO duties detailed in 29 CFR 1960, General 
Salomon requested the AMC DSOHO also do the following: chair the Safety and Occupational Health Council, 
ensure appropriate attention is directed to critical safety and health areas throughout the Command, and annually 
report the "State of the Command" with respect to safety and occupational health. 

Accident Reduction Experience - FY94 

The AMC had an exceptionally safe year based on the reduction in accidents (Class A-C) and injuries. 
Civilian lost time claims (LTC) compared with FY93 were down approximately 5 percent (2038 instead of 21 38). 

'Unless otherwise noted, information in this section was taken from the Safety Office Historical Submission 
for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCSF 

The rate was up approximately 7 percent (26.19 instead of 24.48). Aviation accidents remained the same at one. 
Total ground accidents were down 7 percent (49 instead of 53). Personnel injuries (military, NAF, foreign 
nationals) were down 4 percent (24 instead of 25). Army motor vehicle related accidents were down 80 percent 
(2 instead of 10). Privately owned vehicle accidents were up by 20 percent (6 instead of 5). The number of fires 
stayed the same at one. There were no explosives accidents. Property damage accidents other than those in the 
other categories were up 42 percent (7 instead of 10). 

AMC Supplement 1 TO AR 385-10 

The Safety Office revised, staffed, and published the AMC Supplement 1 to AR 385-10, The Army Safety 
Program, in FY94. It was necessary because of the closure of the AMC Field Safety Activity and changes in the 
Army Safety Program. The revision was dated 3 November 1993. 

AMC Safety Conference 

HQ AMC held an AMC- wide safety conference, 25-26 April 1994 at the Sheraton National Hotel in 
Arlington, VA. The conference was the first AMC conference since 1986. More than 170 AMC, Army, DOD, 
Navy, and Air Force safety personnel attended. General Salomon provided the keynote address and presented 
Command Safety Awards to Major Subordinate Command (MSC) representatives. Other speakers included the 
following: Ms. Sherri Wasserman Goodman, Deputy Undersecretary of the Defense (Environmental Security); 
Mr. Lewis D. Walker, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Environment, Safety and Health); MG Ray E. 
McCoy, Designated Safety and Occupational Health Official; MG Otto J. Guenther, Executive Director for 
Radiation Safety; MG Thomas L. Prather, Jr., Executive Director for System Safety; BG George E. Friel, 
Executive Director for Chemical / Biological Safety; BG William R. Holmes, Executive Director for Explosives 
Safety; Mr. James A. Gibson, Senior Safety Manager, Army Safety Office; and Mr. Daniel Petersen, noted safety 

System Safety Policy Action Committee (SYSPAC) 

The AMC System Safety Policy Action Committee (SYSPAC) held three productive meetings during FY94. 
Major accomplishments included the following: conducting a line-by-line review of AR 385-16 (System Safety 
Management and Engineering); developing a standardized system safety training package for AMC Program 
Managers; revising the selection criteria for AMC System Safety Professional of the Year; and evaluating the 
various methodologies for assessing risk. 

System Safety Risk Assessment for M329A2 Cartridge 

The HQ AMC staff processed and recommended acceptance of a high-level safety risk associated with the 
M329A2 Cartridge. The risk was associated with the potential hazard of premature, in-bore detonation due to 
double loading. The CG AMC accepted the risk based on several factors: training restrictions were in place to 
mitigate the hazard; the publication of precautions in the technical and field manuals; and the scheduled 
replacement of the 4.2 Inch Mortar System by the 120mm Mortar System. 


Resource Management AMCSF 

AMC Supplement 1 to AR 385-69 

The Safety Office wrote, staffed, and published AMC Supplement 1 to the new AR 385-69, Biological 
Defense Safety Program, in FY94. The supplement provides additional guidance and prescribes responsibilities 
for MSCs and installations to set up a biological defense safety program, a new requirement. 

Accident Free Year for Explosives Safety 

Fiscal Year 1994 was a year of unparalleled success for the AMC Explosives Safety Program. For the first 
time in many years, AMC recorded no Class A, B, or C accidents involving ammunition or explosives. This 
compares very favorably to AMC's explosives accident experience averaged over the preceding four years: two 
Class A through C accidents and one fatality per year. 

AMMOPAC Safety Program Assistance Reviews (SPARs) 

The Ammunition Explosives Safety Policy Action Committee (AMMOPAC) held its seventh meeting on 19 
August 1994. It agreed that the scope of its functions should include on-site explosives safety assistance visits. 
It can make these visits in response to requests, or where needed as determined by the AMMOPAC. Reports will 
be left with the local commander. The AMMOPAC will not require responses. The AMMOPAC appointed an 
ad hoc working group to participate in the first visit. It would also draft a SOP for conducting SPARs. At the 
request of HQTECOM, an AMMOPAC team did a comprehensive explosives safety program assistance review 
at Yuma Proving Ground (YPG), 12-15 September 1994. The team produced 30 substantive recommendations 
for consideration by the Commander, YPG. The ad hoc working group has prepared a preliminary draft SOP. 

Status of AMC-R 385-100. Safety Manual 

During FY94, the AMMOPAC prepared a complete revision of AMC-R 385-100. It required extensive 
changes in response to carrying out of the new AR and DA Pamphlet 385-64. The AMMOPAC received many 
comments and recommendations in response to staffing the new AMC-R within AMC. The recommendations 
were of sufficient significance that it warrants a second staffing process. The Safety Office expects publication 
during FY 1995. 

AMMOPAC Ad Hoc Working Group - Hazard Analysis 

To address controversial hazard analysis issues from AMC-R 385-100, AMMOPAC appointed an ad hoc 
working group to develop a methodology. The group's recommendations helped develop a proposed AMC policy 
on risk management for waivers and exemptions. This policy empowers AMC MSC and installation commanders 
to accept deviations from explosives safety standards. The risk level in these deviations must be commensurate 
with the decision level. The policy will serve as a model for other MACOMs. Ultimately, it will be the basis for 
new DA risk management policy. 

AMMOPAC Tasker from Armv Fuze Safety Review Board (AFSRB) 

In FY94, the AMMOPAC accepted a technology generation task from the AFSRB. The AMMOPAC will 
take a lead role in establishing a fuze safety and arming mechanisms methodology. This will make sure that they 
are within "safe separation" requirements for white phosphorous (WP) filled munitions. Although a model exists 


Resource Management AMCSF 

for evaluating fuzes for high explosive ammunition, they do not apply to WP projectiles or warheads. The 
AMMOPAC will obtain ideas from the ammunition and smoke research and development, medical, safety, and 
user communities. The objective is a model that has the confidence and general acceptance of the developer and 

Aviation Accident Experience 

The Command experienced one Class A aircraft accident and one Class C aircraft accident during FY 94. 
A contractor-operated AH-64A APACHE was involved in the Class A accident near Farmerville, LA, on 14 
February 1994. Investigation determined that failure of the main rotor blade strap assembly occurred due to 
fatigue cracking originating in corroded areas. The accident fatally injured both pilots of the AH-64A. A 
UH-60A BLACKHAWK helicopter undergoing an acceptance test flight at Corpus Christi Army Depot was 
involved in the Class C accident. The investigation concluded that the crew failed to secure the nose door before 
flight. The accident resulted in nearly $13.5K in damage / repair. 

Accident Free Flight Award s 

Twelve AMC aviation organizations became eligible for accident-free flight awards during FY94. For 
completing one year without an accident, White Sands Missile Range received the Army Accident Prevention 
Award of Accomplishment for Safety. The following sites received the Army Accident Prevention Award of 
Honor for completing two years without an accident: Yuma Proving Ground, the Aviation Technical Test Center 
and the Aviation Applied Technology Directorate. 

Eight of the twelve organizations attained highly noteworthy accomplishments for continuing their long 
standing accident-free records: Phillips Army Airfield (Aberdeen Proving Ground) completed nine years without 
an accident; Electronic Proving Ground completed ten years; Airborne Electronics Evaluation Support Activity 
(CECOM) completed 1 1 years; Airworthiness Qualification Test Directorate (TECOM) and Night Vision Branch 
of Airborne Electronics Evaluation Support Activity completed 12 years; Redstone Army Airfield completed 13 
years; Chemical Biological Defense Command completed 14 years; Dugway Proving Ground completed 15 years. 

AMC Aviation Safety and Standardization Symposium 

The FY94 AMC Aviation Safety and Standardization Symposium took place at Bedford, TX, during 24-28 
January 1994. Highlighted topics included the following: the consolidation of Army Regulations AR 95-1 and 
95-3, conversion to SP-8 aviation fuel, aircrew coordination program status, AMC aviation downsizing, risk 
management and the year end review of the Army and AMC Aviation Safety Programs. Common concerns 
centered on the continued downsizing efforts in both aircraft and personnel and their impact on mission 
accomplishment. A message, on assigning only well trained, qualified individuals to efforts leading to or 
supporting the flight mission, was well received. The continuing exchange of valuable safety information by all 
available avenues clearly supported efforts to protect the force. 

Aviation Safety Survey s 

The following sites completed Aviation Safety Accident Prevention Surveys: Yuma Proving Ground, 
Electronic Proving Ground, Dugway Proving Ground, White Sands Missile Range, Redstone Arsenal, Aberdeen 
Proving Ground, Chemical and Biological Defense Command, Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command, 


Resource Management AMCSF 

Tooele Army Depot, Anniston Army Depot and Communications-Electronics Command. Additionally, surveys 
of OLR sites at Fort Carson and Fort Lewis were completed. Each location attained satisfactory ratings. 
However, the surveys observed noticeable variances in areas concerning Occupational Safety and Health 
requirements. Personnel reductions and the lack of available resources reportedly were predominant factors. 
Expectations for improved programs throughout the Command aviation community remain high and it receives 
strong Command attention. 

Suspended Cable at White Sands Missile Range 

Considerable activity took place during FY94 to resolve the hazard of a suspended cable at White Sands 
Missile Range (WSMR). The cable is within restricted airspace that is releasable only by Cherokee Control, the 
military radar unit at WSMR. Even with this requirement, several instances have occurred where aircraft, 
primarily jets, have violated this airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) initially declined to chart 
the cable location on aeronautical maps; however, involvement of the Army Aeronautical Services Agency 
resulted in subsequent FAA approval. The next chart update, will reflect changes. Other actions include a $1 .5 
million MCA request to mark more clearly the cable support structures with strobe lights. They have increased 
efforts to brief scheduled users. Efforts continue to highlight the cable hazard to all aircraft operating in the 

Health Physics Career Program 

In 1 994, the Army Health Physicists (HP) Career Program made significant strides. First, job series 
GS-1306 transferred to the Safety and Occupational Health Management Career Program (Career Program 12). 
This job series has more than 60 health physicists attached to it. Second, the HQ AMC Safety Health Physicist 
became the HP Functional Representative (the career advisor) to HQDA. Revision of the HP Career Program 
resulted in hiring the first HP intern class. These moves, and others planned in 1995, will provide the Army's HP 
with both a representative and a career program. This will help them get the most benefit from their careers. 

Update on Depleted Uranium (DU) Vehicle Recovery Plan 

In 1 994, the Safety Office spearheaded the development of a plan to recover vehicles potentially DU- 
contaminated. The General Accounting Office audited the Army's use of DU in the Gulf War and recommended 
a recovery plan. It is a comprehensive scheme, assuring that vehicles affected by DU contamination transfer 
properly from the battlefield to depot repair. The final plan went to HQDA in July 1994. HQ AMC worked 
closely with other Army and DOD agencies in the project: i.e., Office of the Army Surgeon General, U.S. Army 
Training and Doctrine Command and U.S. Marine Corps. They are expanding the plan into an Army regulation 
addressing the contamination of vehicles with other radioactive materials. The time frame for development of 
the regulation is set for FY95. 

Radiological Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Issues 

As the Army downsizes, it must ensure that installations leaving active service are not contaminated with 
radioactive materials from Army operations. Many Army installations used radioactive commodities under MSC 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses. The Army must prove, to the NRC and states, that they are 
uncontaminated and comply with Federal and State policies / regulations. This responsibility involves ensuring 
that they conduct radiological surveys at such facilities, and that survey results are valid. The AMCSF has 


Resource Management AMCSF 

worked with the MSCs and the Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine on this. They have 
developed a long term Army strategy. It identifies the major players, orchestrates the major actions, and ensures 
that survey costs are in the budgetary process. 

The BRAC radiological surveys for Fort Old, CA, were completed in April 1994. They surveyed more than 
200 buildings and about 50 sites (land) for radioactive contamination. No significant radioactive contamination 
was found. 

In addition, they surveyed and closed out the Presidio of San Francisco in 1994. Surveys at Pueblo Army 
Depot Activity, Sacramento Army Depot and Lexington Blue Grass Army Depot began. These surveys will be 
completed in 1995. The next major troop installation scheduled to undergo a BRAC radiological survey is Fort 
Devens, MA. 

Health Physicists Transferred from Fort Belvoir 

In February 1994, four health physicists stationed at the Belvoir Research, Development, and Engineering 
Center transferred to other AMC activities. This was significant because it saved four individuals who would 
have otherwise been lost through a reduction in force. Health physicists are rare commodities in the Army, 
working with the health physics program, which is sensitive, both politically and environmentally. In addition, 
AMC has submitted a Material Weakness to HQDA because of a shortage of health physicists. The transfer did 
not help the Material Weakness; however, by saving the four health physicists, it made it no worse. Three health 
physicists transferred to Test, Measurement and Diagnostic Equipment Activity, and one to 
Communications-Electronics Command. 

Chemical Agent Safety and Health Policy Action Committee (CASHPAC) 

During FY94, CASHPAC continued in its innovative leadership role for chemical agent safety. The 
following actions were initiated: The CASHPAC initiated the Chemical Agent Monitoring Joint Working Group 
to investigate recommendations or concerns of organizations outside the Army that involve air monitoring of 
chemical agent storage areas. The ERDEC (Edgewood Research, Development and Engineering Center) Safety 
Office chairs the group. Membership included monitoring and safety personnel from AMC chemical agent 
storage installations. A major area of interest was the National Research Council's recommendation to 
continuously monitor chemical agent storage areas continuously. The group will recommend methods of 
continuous air monitoring to the CASHPAC. It will also provide technical information to help sites in developing 
monitoring plans. 

The CASHPAC also initiated the Commercial Protective Clothing Joint Working Group. It evaluates test 
data and "use" scenarios on commercial protective clothing in chemical agent operations and provides 
recommendations to DA. The group established a charter and agreed to its operations and functions. 

Commercial Protective Clothing for Chemical Agent Operations 

The CASHPAC developed a process to permit the use of commercial protective clothing during toxic 
chemical agent operations. AMC endorsed the process and the Director of Army Safety approved it. 


Resource Management AMCSF 

The basis of the process is a matrix of chemical protective clothing requirements versus "use" scenarios 
(applications). Commercial clothing must meet the minimum requirements for each specific "use" scenario before 
seeking DA approval. 

The use of commercial chemical protective clothing expands the Army inventory of available protective 
clothing. It does not prevent the use of existing Army clothing. This gives personnel in toxic chemical operations 
more clothing options to address a wide mix of chemical hazards. The goal is clothing that protects workers 
against military chemical agents and other hazardous substances (asbestos and non-military chemicals). 

As an added benefit, OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) approves most commercial 
chemical protective clothing for use. Currently, no one has tested the military protective clothing to OSHA 

Safety Inspection of Russian Technical Inspection Equipment 

In support of the Chemical Weapons Convention Treaty Inspection- Wyoming Agreement, AMCSF led the 
government technical team evaluating Russian technical inspection equipment. The Russians planned to use their 
equipment at U.S. Army chemical agent storage sites. 

The evaluations assessed each item's potential exposure to / creation of physical and chemical hazards and 
its potential for initiating explosive environments. A matrix chart was developed depicting where each item will 
be in use. Because of this effort, DA authorized a safety release and distributed it to each of the storage sites. 

Electronic Communication for Chemical Safety Offices 

The establishment of an electronic (E-mail) system will provide all chemical agent safety and operations 
offices with timely information. The field can receive policy and guidance within minutes of official approval. 
The entire chemical safety community received information and answers to questions. This E-mail network 
rapidly provided information and greatly reduced the quantity of postage and paper normally used. 


Resource Management AMCSG 


Mission and Organization 

The mission of the Office of the AMC Surgeon is KEY personnel during FY94 

., ,. , .. ___ ..,-, . Position/Name Date Assigned Date Departed 

to provide policy and guidance to HQ AMC and surgeon 

subordinate elements on all medical matters. This col Howard a. wiener, mc Sep9i Aug 94 

includes providing guidance regarding occupational and pep. s^^/^iZ^riLence AUg ** 
environmental health programs, including occupational col John r. Hammond, ms Aug 93 Aug 94 

medicine, industrial hygiene, sanitation, ionizing and Medic , a] Ph) fS "* 

JO ' ° LTC John C. Johnson, MS Jun91 Apr 94 

nonionizing radiation protection, pest management, and ltc Charles t. Keisey, MS Jul 94 
environmental health engineering. The Surgeon's Health Hazards Assessments 

... ... ., r .. , LTC Welford C. Roberts, MS Dec 92 

mission also involves providing guidance for the early occupational Medicine 
identification, assessment, and control of health hazards ltc Benjamin g. withers, mc Jun 94 
in AMC-controlled materiel. This enables AMC to ^S^™' AMC00M A pr93 
reduce adverse health effects to the user. 1 industrial Hveienist 

Mr. John S. Svalina, GS- 1 4 Jun 82 

~ . n..»j . ~,v- /• ■ n ... Secretary (Office Automation) 

During FY94, the Office of the Surgeon maintained Ms . Judi Bowies, GS-8 Dec 74 

its authorization level of eight individuals. On 12 July 

1994, LTC Keisey replaced LTC Johnson as the Chief, Medical Physics. This position had been vacant for three 

months. MAJ Metcalf, in May 1994, vacated the active duty environmental science officer position at U.S. Army 

Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command (AMCCOM). LTC Withers, MC, assumed the Chief, 

Occupational Medicine position, on 14 June 1994, which was vacant for one year. COL Hammond, Sanitary 

Engineer Officer left in August 1994; the position remains unfilled. COL Wiener departed from AMC on 12 

August 1994. COL Evenson assumed the Command Surgeon position on 13 August 1994. 

The three JMAs did two weeks of active duty at various installations. The Occupational Health Nurse, COL 
Brickey, and the Entomologist, LTC Boobar, conducted two weeks of special projects for Walter Reed Army 
Medical Center. LTC Dicey, Health Physicist, did his two weeks of active duty at Redstone Arsenal. 

Occupational Health 

The AMC / Health Services Command (HSC) Occupational Health Partnership Program's (OHPP) start up 
period was completed at the end of FY94. Mature programs should be in place at each installation. The AMC 
Management Engineering Activity's (MEA's) role as a facilitator ended. Its role as a data collector / reporter 
becomes the responsibility of the U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (Provisional) 
(CHPPM), formerly the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (AEHA). With a new Surgeon and Chief 
of Occupational Medicine assigned, a comprehensive assessment of the OHPP is underway. Field reports and 
data reviews suggest the OHPP have made progress in the past three years. Some Installation Commanders (ICs) 
are now actively managing their Occupational Health programs, resulting in significant savings and risk 
avoidance. However, many are not. AMCSG perceives five problem areas: 

'Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the Office of the Surgeon Historical 
Submission for FY94. 


Resource Management AMCSG 

• Data Simplicity: The present management indicators (metrics) may not be readily collectable by installation 

• Data Collection: Data is often carelessly or inaccurately collected at the installations. 

• Medical Officer Rating Chain: At most installations, the IC is not in the rating chain of the supporting clinic 
chief. This results in a significant loss of power for the ICs. 

• Disagreement on Support Issues: ICs and supporting Medical Department Activity Commanders 
(MEDDAC) must come to agreement on mutual support and funding issues by developing and signing local 
Interservice Support Agreements (ISSAs). 

• Command Emphasis: Some ICs with low performing occupational health programs are not managing them 

The Surgeon's Office will work to address these problems during FY95. 

On 28 October 1993, the CG, General Ross, signed a memorandum saying that effective installation 
Occupational Safety and Health Programs (OSHP) result in a long term monetary savings. GEN Ross 
reemphasized the ICs responsibility for ensuring protection of employees from workplace hazards and providing 
adequate medical services. He delineated specific OHPP responsibilities for each commander. 

On 5 April 1 994, the new CG, GEN Leon E. Salomon, sent the command an update of the AMC / HSC 
OHPP. He provided a milestone for finalization of ISSAs between AMC installations and their supporting 
MEDDAC / Medical Center (MEDCEN). He encouraged the ICs to take an active role in managing and 
evaluating their occupational health programs. 

AMCSG and HSC were hosts to quarterly (November, February, June and September) In-Process Reviews 
(IPRs). The IPRs critiqued OHPP metric data, received status reports from OHPP's six regional coordinators, 
addressed resource management and Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA) issues, and discussed the 
CHPPM's enlarged role in the OHPP. COL Evenson, LTC Withers and Mr. Svalina conducted a liaison visit to 
Corpus Christi Army Depot with the September IPR, since it was in the geographical area. 

AMCSG was the host to three medical corps officers currently in the Preventive Medicine Residency at 
Walter Reed Army Institute for Research (WRAIR). The officers became acquainted with AMCs programs for 
Occupational Health (OH) and Industrial Hygiene (W). Residents spent one day at AMC HQ receiving briefings 
about AMC, the AMCSG's Office, medical support to the command and current projects of each AMCSG staff 
officer. The Surgeon and Mr. Svalina, Industrial Hygienist, then accompanied the residents on one day (12-16 
September) visits to Rock Island Arsenal and Pine Bluff Arsenal. At each installation they received a tour of the 
industrial site and visited the installation clinic to discuss Army OH and IH programs, policies and problems. 
The visits greatly enhanced the residents understanding of unique AMC medical issues. 

AEHA Services 

AEHA provided the support of nearly $1 ,728,913.00 direct, nonreimbursable, consultative dollars to AMC 
installations and program managers. This support was for the areas of Industrial Hygiene, Occupational Health, 


Resource Management AMCSG 

Pest Management, Environmental Quality, Nonionizing and Ionizing Radiation Control, and Health Hazard 
Assessment. The funds helped the installations comply with environmental and occupational health laws and 
regulations. The Office of the Surgeon planned and coordinated these services, evaluated recommendations for 
adequacy, appropriateness, and required response from the requesting subordinate command on those issues 
affecting regulatory compliance. 

On 2 August 1994, the U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (CHPPM) 
(Provisional) became active at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD. The CHPPM's mission is to provide worldwide 
technical support for integrating preventive medicine, public health, and wellness / Health Promotion Services 
(HPS) into all aspects of the Army. The U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM) formed the CHPPM from 
the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (USAEHA) and will add other elements from MEDCOM to 
broaden its capabilities. AMC will continue to receive the support as mentioned above from the CHPPM, and 

Occupational Medicine 

Operational Issues. In 1991 and 1992, the U.S. Army deployed a half million military members and several 
thousand civil servants to Southwest Asia (SWA) during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm (ODS / DS). 
Many returning veterans and civilians have since reported many unexplained health problems. During FY94, 
Congress legislated Veterans' Administration (VA) compensation for these veterans. Congress directed the DOD 
and VA to enroll all veterans in the Comprehensive Clinical Evaluation Program (CCEP), aimed at collecting 
data, defining the problem, seeking etiologies, and finding cures. Civilians were not eligible for the CCEP. The 
AMC CG requested that AMC civilians be eligible for all Gulf War illness related programs. By 30 June 1994, 
the MEDCOM POC reported that all DA Civilians (DACs) who deployed on ODS / DS were eligible for the 
CCEP. By the close of the FY, the Undersecretary of the Army for Personnel and Readiness, had drafted a letter 
clarifying this eligibility, which remains unsigned. 

In July 1 994 the U.S. deployed a task force to help with the relief effort in Rwanda. AMC deployed hundreds 
of soldiers and civilians. On 22 July 1994, LTC Withers and COL Hammond published a document entitled 
Medical Information for AMC Personnel Deployed to Rwanda. The three-page pamphlet included a medical 
threat analysis, preventive medicine measures, and other medical information. 

Chemical Surety. In September 1994, the AMC Surety Field Activity transferred responsibility for securing 
and coordinating medical augmenter support to Surety Management Reviews (SMRs) to MEDCOM (Prov.). 
MEDCOM will be the single manager for all physicians who serve as medical augmenters to the Chemical Surety 
Program (CSP) reviews. This includes SMRs, DAIG Chemical Surety Inspections, and On Site Inspection 
Agency (OSIA) inspections of surety sites in the former Soviet Union. The Command Surgeon and the Chief, 
Occupational Medicine will continue to serve as medical augmenters and provide technical assistance on medical 
issues concerning the CSP. 

Other. On 26 July 1994, AMCSG forwarded command-wide a memorandum on medical care for 
Department of the Army Civilians (DACs), which the Office of The Surgeon General published. This 
memorandum clarifies what medical services from the DOD military health services system are available to 
deployed DACs. It entitles DACs to in-theater medical care, including MEDEVAC, equivalent to that given 
active duty military at no cost to the DAC. 


Resource Management AMCSG 

Industrial Hygiene 

On 20 December 1993, the AMC Safety Office, HQDA (DACS-SF), and the Deputy Assistant Secretary 
of the Army (Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health) sent a memorandum to the Director for Safety and 
Occupational Health Policy, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment). The memo provided an 
explanation of HQ AMC's policy toward the OSHA Nitroglycerin Standard. The DA concurred, including the 
Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG). However, DOD has not yet responded. 

On 25 January 1994, the Mr. Svalina completed management of an urgent request for an indoor air quality 
investigation for HQ TECOM. It involved an allegation of a potential cancer cluster among female employees 
from a female TECOM employee. She also expressed her concerns to her Congressional representative, which 
stimulated a letter of inquiry from his district office. The expeditious response and preparation of an immediate 
action plan resulted in a satisfactory conclusion, which included remedial recommendations and professional 
medical counseling. An occupational health professional expeditiously answered the employee's concerns with 
facts and empathy to ensure a satisfied employee. 

Mr. Svalina continued to seek OTSG recognition of the new role for IHs assigned to AMC installations with 
chemical missions. He recommended provision of uniform guidance and training to the effected Ms. Without 
this proactive stance, expecting additional citations from the DAIG at other AMC sites is reasonable. 

On 3 May 1994, Mr. Svalina concluded management of the proactive investigation of potentially chemically 
/ biologically contaminated Ml Als filters from battle damaged Ml Series Tanks returned from Operation Desert 
Storm. He reviewed the basic and subsequent correspondence, forwarded vital information and assigned 
necessary actions. He notified all pertinent parties of the informational disparity concerning M1A1 tank 
maintenance. He wrote them in the OTSG's reply to Senator Shelby and the Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) 
report. Senator Shelby received a copy of the ANAD report as well. 

On 20 April 1994, Mr. Svalina forwarded a memorandum, "Update on Recent and Pending Decisions 
Regarding Hantavirus," to all MSCs. He advised distribution to all their subordinate organizations. On 2 May 
1994, Mr. Svalina sent a memorandum to MSCs concerning facts about OSHA's Confined Spaces standard and 
he requested distribution of the vital information to subordinate organizations. 

Health Hazard Assessment Program 

Trends and Statistics. The Health Hazard Assessment (HHA) Program is a domain of the Manpower and 
Personnel (MANPRINT) Program (reference: AR 602-2, Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT) 
in the Materiel Acquisition Process) and is an independent program (reference: AR 40-10, Health Hazard 
Assessment Program in Support of the Materiel Acquisition Decision Process). It is the mechanism by which 
the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) supports the material developer during the research, development, test, 
and evaluation of Army weapons, systems, equipment, and other materials. The AMEDD anticipates, identifies, 
and provides recommendations to prevent or reduce health hazards to users, maintainers, and the environment. 

The product of the HHA process is a Health Hazard Assessment Report (HHAR). An HHAR consists of 
a summary, background, identification of the health hazard issues, assessment of the health hazards, and 
recommendations. The HHA Program Manager in AMCSG manages the program for AMC. This office 
coordinated more than 174 requests for HHA support. The HHARs provided information to control or eliminate 


Resource Management AMCSG 

health hazards for Program Executive Officer (PEO) and AMC managed programs. The HHA Program Manager 
and the Industrial Hygienist did approximately 34 percent (59) of the assessments. 

The restructuring of the AMEDD has resulted in some changes in the HHA Program. This restructuring 
included downsizing of the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) and establishment of the U.S. Army Medical 
Command (MEDCOM). OTSG abolished the HHA Officer position. MEDCOM established the U.S. Army 
Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (Provisional) (CHPPM). CHPPM's HHA Division 
(formerly the HHA Office of the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency) became the lead agency for the 
Army HHA Program. Because of these changes AMCSG interacts directly with the HHA Division on both policy 
and technical issues. 

At right is a recent statistical summary prepared by 

the HHA Division, CHPPM. It Shows that AMC Summary of HHARs Produced by CHPPM 

historically has been and continues to be the primary Fiscal Year Total Number Number (Percent) of 

customer of the HHA Program. °f hhars HHARswith amc as 


82 29 29 (100%) 

HHA Pocket Guide. The HHA Program Manager 83 41 39(95%) 

(PM) developed a tri-fold brochure titled the Materiel JJ J] JJ gj*j 

Developer's Pocket Guide to Systems Health Hazards. 86 62 59 (95%) 

The brochure helps the materiel developer (MATDEV) S1 " 69 (92%) 

community to get Health Hazard Assessment Reports 89 75 66 ( g 8%) 

(HHARs) to support the acquisition / development 90 62 51 (82%) 

91 73 68 (98%) 

process. 92 115 no (96%) 

93 99 93 (94%) 

94 HI 105 (95%1 

TOTALS: 899 836 (93%) 

DODI 5000.2 (Defense Acquisition Management 
Policies and Procedures) requires the services to 
incorporate a Human Systems Integration (HSI) process into the materiel acquisition and development process. 
This process includes health hazard considerations. AR 40-10 (Health Hazard Assessment Program in Support 
of the Army Materiel Acquisition Decision Process) provides the policy and application of the health program 
for the Army. 

The HHA PM designed the pocket guide to provide MATDEVs a concise and simple resource. They can 
use it to initiate the HHA process and get HHARs to meet the requirements of acquisition and health regulations. 
Selected representatives from the MATDEV and medical communities were involved in the development and 
review of the pocket guide. The HHA PM distributed the pocket guide to the following communities: 

MATDEV Combat Developer (TRADOC) 


MANPRINT System Safety (including AMCSF) 

AMCRDE Human Engineering (ARL, HRED) 

Permethrin Treatment of the Desert Battle Dress Uniform (DBDU). At the request of PM, Soldier, the 
HHA Program Manager coordinated a reassessment of the potential health hazards associated with exposure to 


Resource Management AMCSG 

permethrin, an insect repellent. An HHAR that addressed this situation was prepared previously and concluded 
that they anticipated no adverse health effects to soldiers or garment workers from wearing permethrin-treated 
garments. A risk assessment conducted by the National Research Council (reference: Health Effects of 
Permethrin-Impregnated Army Battle-Dress Uniforms [BDUs]) reached this conclusion. The reassessment, 
issued as an Updated HHAR, concluded that the information reported in the original HHAR is still valid 
(reference: Health Hazard Assessment of the Permethrin Treatment of the Desert Battledress Uniform (DBDU), 
Project No. 69-37-X3U4-94). 

Field Drinking Water. The HHA Program Manager participated in a Field Drinking Water Medical Issues 
Working Group Meeting on 6 April 1994. The Preventive Medicine Division, OTSG, formed and chaired the 
Working Group. CHPPM is the lead agency for the working group. 

The working group reviews and develops recommendations for the medical aspects of field drinking water 
quality. This includes drinking water standards (e.g., chemical and bacteriological quality), disinfection methods, 
and water quality analysis equipment. Sometimes, issues and recommendations developed by the Working Group 
are presented to the Water Resources Management Action Group (WRMAG), a NATO level organization. 

Other organizations represented in the Working Group include the following: the U.S. Army Medical 
Research and Materiel Command, U.S. Army Medical Department Center and School, U.S. Army Medical 
Command, U.S. Army Belvoir Research Development and Engineering Center, U.S. Army Natick Research 
Development and Engineering Center, U.S. Department of Defense Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center, 
U.S. Army Quartermaster School, U.S. Air Force Armstrong Laboratory, Naval Environmental Health Center, 
and the Marine Corps Research, Development and Acquisition Command. AMCSG's interest in the Working 
Group is to remain abreast of field drinking water issues that may affect the design and development of water 
producing and monitoring equipment. 

Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP). The HHA Program Manager 
is a member of the Risk Assessment Methodology (RAM) Working Group, Environmental Health Assessment 
Program (EHAP) of the SERDP. EHAP is a cooperative effort to improve health risk assessment research across 
federal agencies to include: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Energy, the Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and the Departments of Defense, Army, Air Force, and Navy. 

The figure at the right Shows the Organization Of Organization of the EHAP Program. 

the EHAP. The Army representative to the ehac 

Environmental Health Assessment Committee (EHAC) 

•wt ' n it; ii r^ a-^^o e Advisory and Coordinating Committee 

is Mr. Lewis D. Walker, Deputy Assistant Secretary of i 

the Army for Environment, Safety, and Occupational 

Health. Army organizations represented at the Risk *™ G ™ ££R££, 

Committee and Working Group levels include the 

following: U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine, U.S. Army Medical Research and 

Materiel Command, and HQ, AMC. 

This fiscal year the HHA Program Manager participated in several meetings (Washington, D.C., 24 February 
1994; Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH, 18 April 1994; conference call, 28 September 1994); during which 
the RAM Working Group, EHAP of the SERDP, refined the EHAC organization and developed charters and 


Resource Management AMCSG 

AMCSG's interest in EHAP, and specifically the RAM, relates to the risk assessment process and its 
application in the HHA Program. It has direct application to the assignment of Risk Assessment Codes (RACs) 
which is a component of the HHA Program. At the 1 8 April meeting the AMC HHA Program Manager raised 
a point about the RAM Working Group. It also needs to assess impacts from other stressors (e.g., noise, 
radiation, biological substances, etc.) that AMC has to deal rather than limiting it to chemical substances. 

Management Information Systems. The HHA Program Manager has developed a generic HHAR to 
support the development of Management Information Systems (MISs). The HHAR was prepared to respond to 
an inquiry from a Tactical Management Information System (TACMIS) developers responsible for a variety of 
systems. These systems will have the same or similar basic platform. The platform is non-developmental, 
commercial-off-the-shelf automatic data processing equipment, requiring no further design efforts or 

Typical potential health hazards associated with MISs are: those identified by the commercial manufacturers; 
radiation energy (typical ionizing radiation from a cathode ray tube and nonionizing radiation from CD-ROMs 
and laser disk players); acoustic energy (e.g., printer noise); chemical substances (e.g., toner cartridges and 
batteries); and Ergonomic related effects (e.g., back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, shoulder pain, eye fatigue, leg 
discomfort, etc.). Generally, when the operator uses the system according to the manufacturer's directions, there 
is no health hazard anticipated. 

The developer must request a formal health hazard assessment through this office for a specific system, when 
any of the following conditions occur: placing the system in a tactical vehicle or mounted shelter; establishing 
a maintenance concept that requires Defense Department personnel, military or civilian, to repair radiation 
producing equipment; introducing items into the system that fall into the health hazard classes listed in AR 40-10, 
Health Hazard Assessment Program in Support of the Materiel Acquisition Decision Process; and, if there is 
uncertainty whether a material, process, or operation introduces a health hazard. 

To test the adequacy of this generic HHAR, the HHA Program Manager serves as the HHA Representative 
to the MANPRINT Joint Working Group (MJWG) for the Corps / Theater Automatic Data Processing Center 
U (CTASC-II), Split Operations where he is applying and testing the concept. This generic HHAR should help 
streamline the development process for MISs. 

Standard for Lead Exposure from Military Weapons. The HHA Program Manager reviewed the 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Level (PEL) for lead (Pb) and 
its basis. Subsequently AMCSG requested that OTSG consider developing a military unique occupational 
exposure criteria / standard for airborne lead exposure from military weapons by gunners and crew members. 
Materiel and combat developers must design weapons or restrict weapon usage to comply with the OSHA PEL, 
according to requirements. 

The OSHA PEL for lead is based on an eight-hour Time- Weighted Average (TWA), and its purpose is 
prevention of adverse health effects from chronic exposure to low air-lead concentrations. It also assumes that 
the exposure is continuous for a thirty-day period and assumes a tenure of five years. The military exposure 
scenario to weapon combustion differs from that assumed by OSHA. The characteristics are the following: high 
air concentrations; short and intermittent exposure duration; work span / military service time that differs from 
the civilian work force; and a young exposed population. The Army test protocol requires conversion of air 
samples from short-term high level emissions to an 8-hour exposure to allow comparison to the OSHA PEL. 


Resource Management AMCSG 

Based on military exposure parameters, AMCSG believes that lead toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics 
(absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion) may differ from those associated with the chronic, low-level, 
"OSHA-type" exposure. 

For criteria / standard, development, review and evaluation of several military studies is necessary. AMCSG 
suggested the formation of a working group with representatives from several Army agencies to review the 
requirement and develop a proposed criterion / standard. OTSG tasked the U.S. Army Center for Health 
Promotion and Preventive Medicine to coordinate this review effort. AMCSG's HHA Program Manager 
participated in an initial AMEDD Working Group meeting on 31 August 1994. 

HHA Strategy and Strategic Action Plan. The HHA Program Manager participated with the AMEDD 
community in the finalization of a strategy that will move the Army HHA program into the 21st century. He 
ensured that a MATDEV perspective was incorporated into the concept. Mr. Lewis D. Walker, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health, will sign the formal copy during first 
quarter 1995. 

The strategy establishes a vision that will support the changing needs of the modern Army: 

The Army will be the national leader in eliminating health hazards from and integrating 
human performance criteria into the lifecycle management of materiel systems. 

It is a comprehensive strategy that will build upon the past and provide a structure for the Army to meet its 
growing health hazard challenges. The strategy provides a mechanism for identifying new opportunities and 
defining ways to meet this responsibility as part of AMCSG's mission to maintain a trained and ready Army. The 
strategy is modeled after the Army Environmental Strategy employing the idea of pillars and a foundation that 
supports the Army mission. The Pillars - focusing on prevention, protection, performance, sustainment and 
survivability - establishes goals, objectives, and supporting actions. The Foundation Elements - leadership, 
customers, people, training, communication, resources, management and organization - are program requirements 
that are essential to maintaining an HHA Program and apply to all pillars. 

The HHA Program Manager also participated in several meetings to develop the HHA Program Strategic 
Action Plan (SAP). The HHA Strategy is the basis for SAP. SAP identifies major action areas from the HHA 
Strategy and identifies who will do the task(s) and a time table for completion. The major action items in priority 
order are the following: develop adequate resources to start the program; provide HHA support to all key MDRs; 
increase communication (this historical report is part of this action area); review and revise policy and operating 
documents; carry out HHAs on all systems under development; focus the U.S. Army Medical Research and 
Materiel Command's efforts to developer needs; enhance the HHA Program information management system; 
and increase the technical and managerial skills of all personnel. 

Program Communication. The HHA Program Manager continued to help the Army Medical Department 
(AMEDD) in the development of HHA procedural and technical guides. He provided ideas and review comments 
to enhance the nature of the HHA process for the MATDEV. 

The procedural guide is complete and went to final printing during the final quarter of this fiscal year. This 
guide will help the medical community with effectively integrating the HHA into the acquisition process. The 
medical community has reportedly received and used the draft copies of the guide, an omen of success. The HHA 


Resource Management AMCSG 

Program Manager suggests producing a computer disk comprising the guide to allow users to transfer 
information directly into local documents. 

This technical guide will document the current methods used by AMEDD scientists to assess all the hazard 
categories. Development of a second draft occurred this fiscal year. The HHA Program Manager wrote the 
Introduction and provided review comments on all of the technical sections. He gave presentations concerning 
the AMC Perspective on the HHA Program at the 24th Annual Army Environmental Science and Engineering 
Practices Workshop (5-10 June 1994) and the HHA Working Group Meeting (18 July 1994). 

Medical Physics 

Depleted Uranium (DU) Data. On 12 November 1993, AMCSG sent a memorandum on Depleted Uranium 
(DU) Information for Dr. Kamely, Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of the Army (I&LE) for Environmental 
Technology. In response to Mr. Kevin Doxey's, Dr. Kamely's action officer, request for information on DU, LTC 
Johnson provided the following items of information: volume of DU waste, its location, and why it is considered 
low level radioactive waste. The AMCCOM, Executive Agent for Radioactive Waste provided comments 
incorporated into the answers below: 

• Why is DU considered low level radioactive waste and not high level? 

Radioactive waste comes in two broad categories: 

High Level Radioactive Waste (HLRW) presents a potentially life-threatening radiation hazard. It consists 
of nuclear fuel that underwent a fission reaction or "burned" in a reactor. The fission products are intensely 
radioactive. The concentration of radioactive materials in HLRW can exceed thousands of Curies (Ci) per cubic 
foot of waste. 

Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) does not present a life-threatening hazard. It generally includes any 
waste other than high level waste. Depleted uranium falls into the lowest hazard class of LLRW (Class A). For 
transport purposes, DU is a Low Specific Activity (LSA) material. It is subject to the same controls as 
contaminated waste (ex. gloves, paper products, laboratory clothing) discarded by hospitals and laboratories that 
use NRC licensed materials. 

In its solid metallic form (ex. armor plate or penetrator rods) DU has a specific activity of 3.6X10' 7 Ci per 
gram (0.194 Ci / ft 3 ). When DU waste is in contaminated soil, the specific activity is often closer to 35X10 12 
Ci / gm (1 .8X10^ Ci / ft 3 ). For comparison, uncontaminated soil naturally contains approximately 1 .8X10" 12 Ci 
/gm(0.091X10 6 Ci/ft 3 ). 

• What is the volume of DU waste and where is it? 

For FY93 the total volume of DU waste was about 350,000 cubic feet of DU and DU-contaminated 
materials. The principal generators were the following: 

• • Materials Technology Laboratory (from decommissioning). 

• • Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) (from testing operations). 

• • The Department of Energy's Fernald storage site (waste from the depleted uranium armor program). 


Resource Management AMCSG 

For FY94, the estimated volume is 200,000 cubic feet. Figuring out the exact amount is not possible because 
no one knows the extent of the contamination and its physical form. The principal generators and sources are 
the following: 

• • Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG): Test activities. 

• • Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (AAP): Contaminated machinery & production activities. 

• • Lake City AAP: Firing range & production activities. 

• • Yuma Proving Ground: Firing range activities. 

Other potential sources may include ranges that have historically fired DU rounds: 

• • Jefferson Proving Ground, Ethan Allen Firing Range. 

• • R&D facilities such as Picatinny Arsenal and APG. 

• • Ammunition plants doing load, assembly and pack operations such as: Milan AAP, Iowa AAP, Lake 

City AAP, Joliet AAP and Twin Cities AAP. 

• • Demilitarization locations including the Savanna Depot Activity. 

The waste stays on the site until it goes to a licensed burial site in Barnwell, SC. Before burial, waste is 
consolidated and processed to reduce volume as needed at the Defense Consolidation Facility in Snelling, SC. 

ASA(ILE) Meeting on DU Report to Congress. At the request of the Office of The Surgeon General 
(OTSG), LTC Johnson represented OTSG at the subject meeting on 24 March 1994. The Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Environmental Safety and Occupational Health (DASA(ESOH)), Mr. D. Walker, 
briefed representatives of the Army Staff on the Summary Report to Congress - Health and Environmental 
Consequences of Depleted Uranium by the U.S. Army. 

Mr. D. Walker will report to MG Blank, Commander, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, for review. (MG 
Blank is the Army's spokesperson for DU-related health issues.) He hoped to have the report to Congress on or 
shortly after 8 April 1994. He was still developing the details of the release with the DA Public Affairs Office 
(DAPAO) and the Office of Congressional Liaison (OCLL). DAPAO was considering conducting a 
"backgrounder" for the press concurrent with its release to Congress. The Department of the Army had not 
decided how widely they will distribute the report. 

The Summary Report to Congress is a condensation of an exhaustive review of depleted uranium written 
by the Army Environmental Policy Institute (AEPI). AEPI will complete the voluminous technical report, several 
hundred pages. Although, it is an internal Army reference document, the document will be available upon request 
to the Congress and others. Because of its size, wide distribution is not likely. 

Dr. Stephen P. Shelton, Interim Director, AEPI briefed the Summary Report and Mr. Walker introduced him. 
Mr. Walker reminded the group that the report was to be an even, balanced, and credible account of the health 
and environmental issues surrounding DU while recognizing its battlefield effectiveness. He sees the essence of 
the report as: 

• The Army wants first class medical surveillance for the troops in friendly fire accidents involving depleted 


Resource Management AMCSG 

• The Army wants to improve the way it manages depleted uranium. 

AR 40-14 and DA PAM 40-XX 

The Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) accepted AMC comments on AR 40- 1 4 (Occupational Ionizing 
Radiation Personnel Dosimetry) with only minor wordsmithing changes. AMCSG has achieved its objective of 
changing the foundation of the regulation to: 

• Incorporate current, internationally recognized principles of radiation protection. 

• Ensure that radiation protection officers have the flexibility to exercise professional judgment in managing 
their programs. 

AMC's comments were the most comprehensive of those submitted during world-wide staffing of the 
regulation. A product of the October 1 993 Radiation Policy Action Committee (RADPAC) meeting, they show 
the value of that forum, its ability to finish a job, and its technical expertise. RADPAC action on AR 40-1 4 will 
result in significantly enhanced efficiency and effectiveness of radiation protection programs throughout the 

OTSG's goal was to meet the application date of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10CFR20, Standards 
for Protection Against Radiation. 

Investigational Dose Levels for AR 40-14 & DA PAM 40-XX (Personal Dosimetry Guidance and Dose 
Recording Procedures for Personnel Occupationally Exposed to Ionizing Radiation). AMC previously 
recommended the adoption of NRC Regulatory Guide 10.8, Appendix G, Model Program for Maintaining 
Occupational Radiation Exposure at Medical Institutions ALARA, Table I, as a baseline for radiation exposure 
investigational levels. AMCSG proposed revised tables on 17 December 1993. Revision of Table 1 reflects the 
new 10CFR20 dose limits that were to take effect 1 January 1994. The current Regulatory Guide assigns Level 
I and Level II ALARA investigational levels at 0.1 and 0.3 times the applicable dose limits at the time of 
publication (1987, 10CFR20.101). The modified table retained these factors. The changes in dose limits that 
effect the selection of ALARA levels are: 

• Whole Body: No change, ALARA Levels are the same as in the 1987 version of Reg. Guide 10.8, Appendix 

• Eye: In the new regulations, 1 0CFR20. 1 30 1 , the eye stands alone and has a dose limit of 1 5 rems annually. 
Previously it was incorporated with the rest of the whole body and had a limit of 5 rems (1.25 rems 
quarterly). It has adjusted the eye ALARA levels upward. 

• Extremity: The new 10CFR20.1 301 changed the extremity dose from its previous value of 75 rems (18.75 
quarterly) to 50 rems annually. It has adjusted the extremity ALARA levels downward. 

• Skin: The new 10CFR20.1301 changed the extremity dose from its previous value of 30 rems (7.5 rems 
quarterly) to 50 rems annually. It has adjusted the extremity ALARA levels upward. 


Resource Management AMCSG 

The second table, TABLE II, replaced the "annualization" process (Para. 4-10d. of DA Pam 40-XX, page 
38) which would be baffling to the intended audience. TABLE II gives the monthly and quarterly doses that, if 
maintained for an entire year, would result in an over exposure. Note that these were rounded down to the nearest 
50 mrems for simplicity. 

Environmental Health 

The Surgeon's Office continued to support the Military Child Care Act of 1989 by providing preventive 
medicine support to inspections conducted at different AMC installations throughout the United States. Due to 
personnel shortages within the AMC Surgeon's Office, the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency was 
contacted to help with the medical portions of the inspections. These inspections were completed with the 
ADCSPER Office of Community and Family Activity. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 


Organization and Key Personnel 

As Of 1 October 1 993 the Office of the Office of Civilians Military Total Average Grade 

. ^ _. , ,. ... . ... . . ... Actual On Board 89 8 97 12.78 

the Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition had the Authorized on tda 106 13 119 12.72 

strengths listed at the right. Over the course of FY94, 
the following changes took place: ' 

Date Description of Change 

30 October 1993 COL Levanson, Chief, Assessment and Evaluation Division, retired. 

4Tebuary 1994 MG Baldwin officially transferred to HQ, Department of the Army. 

11 April 1994 Mr. Ronald Kuhn was detailed to the Assessment and Evaluation Division 

(AMCAQ-E) and Mr. James Brown replaced him also by detail as Chief, 

Competition and Business Analysis Division (AMCAQ-C), due to an EEO 

complaint that was raised. 
30 April 1994 Mr. Richard R. Rogowski, ADCS for Acquisition, retired. 

25 May 1994 MAJ Thomas E. Aeillo, Executive Officer, was transferred to Fort Sill, 

Oklahoma, and was replaced by LTC Pamela V. Johnson, who was reassigned 

to that position from AMCAQ-E. 
1 7 July 1 994 BG Stuart Gerald became the new Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition. 

1 7 July 1 994 Mr. Gary Tull became the Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition. 

Key personnel in the Office of the DCS for Acquisition include the following: 

MAJ Thomas P. Aeillol Executive Officer, May 1 992 through May 1 994 

Tbomas Craterfield Chief, Integrated Procurement Systems 

Brooks O. Bartholow Chief, Acquisition Support Office 

James W. Brown Acting Chief, Competition and Business Analysis Division, effective 1 1 Apr 94 

Edwin Cornett Chief, Assessment & Evaluation Div, July 1993 thru November 1994 

Gene D. Duncan Acting Chief, Business Interface & Integration, 25 July 1994 

BG Stuart W. Gerald Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition, effective 1 7 July 1 994 

Dianne B. Gilley Chief, Operations Support Division 

LTC Pamela V. Johnson Executive Officer, effective 25 May 1994 

Thomas J. Moran Chief, Contract Policy Division 

James V. O'Brien Chief, Systems Management Policy Division, - 28 November 1991 thru 25 Jul 

94 (Long Term Training-DSMC), Returns 9 December 1994 

1 Unless otherwise noted, all information in this section was taken from the DCS for Acquisition FY94 
Historical Submission. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

Carlos A. Piad Acting Chief, Systems Management Policy Division, 25 July 1994 thru 

9 December 1994 
Sandra Rittenhouse Chief, Business Interface & Integration, 5 April 1993 thru 30 April 1994 

Acting Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition, 1 May 1994 thru 17 

July 1994 
Roger R. Rogowski Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition, retired 30 April 1994 

Robert J. Swanson Acting Chief, Business Interface & Integration, 13 June 1994 thru 23 July 1994 

Gary A. Tull Acting Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition until 17 July 1994, when he 

became Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition 

Other Significant changes can be Summarized as Civilians Military Total Average Grade 

c „ „. .... , . , , Actual On Board 84 8 84 14.04 

follows: Six civilian employees took advantage of Authorized on tda 83 9 83 14.04 

VERA [Voluntary Early Retirement Authority] or VSIP 

[Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay] and retired. Six civilian employees transferred to other offices in HQ AMC. 
Three civilian employees were transferred from DCSRM [Deputy Chief of Staff, Resource Management]. One 
secretary was hired and promoted from US ASAC. One Secretary was promoted in AMCAQ. One employee 
transfened to another government agency. As of 1 October 1994 the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for 
Acquisition had the manpower statistics listed above. 


Acquisition Improvement Field Visits (Roadshows) 

The purpose of the Roadshow initiative is to create a cultural change within the Army. Roadshow field visits 
are designed to train the acquisition work force in streamlining measures so as to reduce the time and cost of 
acquiring equipment and services. The Roadshow training series began in the spring of 1992. During Roadshow 
I, also known as the "Executive Roadshow," over 20 senior Department of the Army (DA) and Army Materiel 
Command (AMC) senior executives traveled to the Army's major buying commands to personally carry the new 
acquisition streamlining philosophy to senior management. At the core of the training was a family of fifteen 
acquisition improvement principles intended as guides for the "change in the way we do business." 

Roadshow II built upon the Roadshow I effort by bringing the acquisition improvement message to middle 
managers of functional support staffs and program offices. During the period October 1992-Febuary 1993, a 
joint DA/AMC team conducted intensive three-day workshops at the major buying commands to foster 
consideration and application of the acquisition improvement principles by managers of the acquisition process. 
The workshops involved small group discussions, case study analysis, classroom lectures, and detailed scrubbing 
of actual solicitations. 

Roadshow ID complemented the training provided during earlier Roadshow efforts. The major focus of 
Roadshow HJ was to demonstrate and provide hands-on experience in the use of Functional Support Templates 
as a tool for eliminating unnecessary functional requirements from solicitations. The training also stressed the 
need for improved acquisition strategies and encouraged the use of Partnering as an alternative disputes resolution 
technique. There were eight two-day Roadshow III field visits which trained about 150 participants at each stop. 
The visits were to Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey (ARDEC), 23-24 September 1993; Warren, Michigan 
(TACOM), 9-10 November 1993; Fort Monmouth, New Jersey (CECOM), 1-2 December 1993; Redstone 
Arsenal, Alabama (MICOM), 7-8 December 1993; Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois (AMCCOM), 14-15 December 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

1993; St. Louis, Missouri (ATCOM), 1 1-12 January 1994; Washington, DC area (HQ AMC), 15-16 February 
1994; and Orlando, Florida (STRICOM), 29-30 March 1994. The Roadshow III seminars were led by LTG Leo 
Pigaty, Deputy Commanding General, AMC, and LTG William Forster, Military Deputy to the Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Research, Development, and Acquisition. 

A series of visits to the smaller, non-systems contracting activities was dubbed Roadshow-Lite. There were 
25 visits throughout AMC over a one year period from August 1993 through July 1994. These seminars were 
led by Mr. Gary Tull, the AMC Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition and Mr. Robert MacFarlane, AMC Deputy 
Command Counsel. The briefings by various functional experts covered a variety of topics, including current 
contracting issues, the latest legal rulings and interpretations, many aspects of acquisition reform, and best value 

The Roadshow for Industry (RSI) series, established in cooperation with the American Defense Preparedness 
Association (ADPA), informs industry as to what the Army is doing in the area of acquisition reform. Three 
regional one-day sessions, led by LTG Pigaty and LTG Forster were held in Moline, Illinois (July 1993), Los 
Angeles, California (October 1993), and Boston, Massachusetts (November 1993). The three seminars attracted 
approximately 200 industry executives representing some 1 06 companies. 

Roadshow IV continues previous training in acquisition improvement practices. Nine two-and-a-half day 
visits, to be led by Mr. Decker, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development, and Acquisition, and 
LTG Cobum, Deputy Commanding General, AMC, are scheduled between December 1994 and May 1995. The 
focus of Roadshow IV training is specifications and standards reform and best value contracting. Hands on 
exercises will give participants experience in analyzing specifications, developing evaluation criteria, and making 
cost/ technical tradeoffs. The scheduled visits include: Warren, Michigan (TACOM), 13-15 December 1994; 
Aberdeen Proving Ground (TECOM/CBDCOM) 10-12 January 1995; Redstone Arsenal, Alabama (MICOM) 
7-9 February 1995; Fort Monmouth, New Jersey (CECOM), 22-24 February 1995; Orlando, Florida 
(STRICOM), 7-9 March 1995; Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey (ARDEC), 21-23 March 1995; Rock Island, 
Dlinois (IOC (Prov)) 4-6 April 1995; St. Louis, Missouri (ATCOM), 25-27 April 1995; and Washington, DC 
Area (HQ AMC), 9-1 1 May 1995. A unique feature of Roadshow IV is the development of an export training 
package which will be used by the major buying commands to implement continued training throughout their own 
commands. Roadshow IV for Industry and for other Army MACOMs will follow training at the AMC buying 

Best Value Contracting 

The National Performance Review of September 1993 and the Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 placed 
renewed emphasis on promoting best value rather than simply low cost in selecting sources for supplies and 
services. Increased usage of this approach, however, raised concerns within the acquisition community and 
industry about confusion over the definition of best value and the inconsistencies in its application. The objective 
of AMC's best value initiative is to establish a common understanding and consistent application of the best value 
contracting approach throughout AMC by: 

• Developing a broad framework for consistency in best value contracting. 

• Developing a common definition of "best value." 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

• Developing a set of guiding principles and best practices. 

• Facilitating best value training. 

In response to these concerns, Mr. Gary Tull, the ADCS for Acquisition, directed a concerted effort to 
improve best value contracting within the AMC community. This effort began with increasing awareness of the 
best value concept through the series of training sessions at the smaller non-systems oriented contracting 
activities. These training sessions were included as part of the Roadshow-Lite acquisition improvement seminars 
conducted at 25 AMC contracting sites over a one-year period from August 1993 through July 1994. 

In January 1994, the DCS for Acquisition sponsored a best value workshop in St. Louis, Missouri for 40 
multifunctional members of the AMC acquisition community. The purpose of the workshop was to bring 
together AMC acquisition experts to develop a common definition and some guiding principles for effective best 
value contracting. A tangible product of the workshop was a colorful laminated card, distributed widely to the 
AMC acquisition community in August 1994. This card sets forth the definition and guiding principles for 
AMC's best value process developed by the workshop participants. 

A guide to best value practices was the result of suggestions made by workshop participants. This guide, 
published as AMC Pamphlet 715-3, Vol 5, in Aug 94 and distributed widely throughout the Army, builds upon 
AMC's basic best value definition and principles. It incorporates many valuable contributions made by members 
of the AMC acquisition community and is designed for a multifunctional audience to include industry. The 
document provides guidance for a broad range of source selections, both formal and informal. 

Some of the topics include planning, structuring the solicitation, evaluation considerations, the selection 
decision, and debriefings. The guide forms the foundation for Roadshow IV acquisition improvement training 
in best value source selection, scheduled throughout AMC in FY95. 


Integrated Procurement Systems Office 

The Integrated Procurement Systems Office provides liaison activities for all aspects of procurement 
automation both in the DOD, DA, and AMC environments. 

As the Army's Functional Requirements Manager, it interfaces with the DOD Procurement Corporate 
Information Management (CIM) Council to ensure that the selected DOD Standard Procurement System satisfies 
all of the Army's acquisition requirements. As a result of a functional/technical evaluation of all DOD 
procurement systems, the DLA [Defense Logistics Agency] Pre- Award Contracting System (DP ACS) has been 
selected as the "migration" system. Recently, a change in leadership at the Procurement CIM Council has 
changed the course of action from "migrating" DP ACS to exploring a commercial alternative. 

As a result of a previous study conducted by BG Wynn (7th Signal Command), AMC obtained the necessary 
funding from the Procurement CIM to re-host the Procurement Automated Data and Document System (PADDS) 
from the current proprietary hardware to an open system environment. MICOM continues to work the project 
with the Division Level Test scheduled for the September 1994 timeframe at MICOM. Currently everything is 
on schedule with the exception of the hardware platforms required by each command. Upon initiation of this 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

effort the concept was to host the application software at the Army Information Processing Centers. However, 
these centers have been transferred from Army control to the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), and 
the required operating system suite of software is not available. Also, upon reviewing a proposal submitted by 
DISA it is not cost effective for AMC to place the PADDS application at the Defense Mega Centers. 

With increased emphasis on Electronic Commerce/Electronic Data Interchange (EC/EDI) in DOD, the 
Integrated Procurement Systems Office maintains close liaison with the Army Procurement Research and 
Analysis Office (APRAO), Fort Lee, Virginia. APRAO is the functional proponent for the Army's Installation 
Level Contracting System: Standard Army Automated Contracting System (SAACONS). At the direction of the 
Deputy Secretary of Defense (Acquisition Reform) a report detailing Electronic Commerce/Electronic Data 
Interchange (EC/EDI) in Contracting was published in December 1994. SAACONS is the only Army system 
that meets the criteria published in the plan. Presently, the Army has deployed EC/EDI capability to 36 sites, and 
future deployment is scheduled for an additional 67 sites. 


Weapons Systems Acquisition Cycle Improvement 

The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition (ODCSAQ) co-sponsored the U.S. Army Materiel 
Command Task Force on Weapons Systems Acquisition Cycle Improvement (Through Integration of Modeling 
and Simulation) in association with the Deputy Chief for Staff for Research, Development, and Engineering. 

This Task Force was charted to develop an implementation plan to begin to incorporate the integrated tools 
and technologies of modeling and simulation under the chairmanship of the Army Materiel Command Principal 
Deputy for Acquisition. This action was a direct result of the October 1993 Association of the United States 
Army (AUSA) symposium. During this symposium, new technologies and initiatives were presented in the area 
of Modeling and Simulation that have a direct impact upon the acquisition process. Through the application of 
these, cycle time could be reduced. 

The Task Force met during the January-May 1 994 timeframe with representatives from Army Materiel 
Command Major Subordinate Commands, Training and Doctrine Command, and other directly interested and 
involved organizations. The Deputy Chief of Staff provided a full time representative to the Task Force. 

Approval and release of the final report occurred on 1 June 1 994. The report provides both near-term ( 1 -2 
years) recommendations as well as mid-term (2-7 years) recommendations. Two recommendations contained 
in the report are considered critical by the Task Force membership. The first is to develop an "Action Plan" for 
implementing the remaining recommendations. The second is "Develop an Integrated Modeling and Simulation 
Infrastructure for Research, Development, and Acquisition (RDA)." 

The report has now been taken and under the direction of the Principal Deputy for Acquisition, an action plan 
is being developed. 

Acquisition Improvement Initiatives Prioritization 

At the request of the Army Materiel Command Principal Deputy for Acquisition, an initiative in support of 
the Acquisition Executive Review Council (AERC) began. This initiative was to collect a listing of acquisition 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

initiatives within the Headquarters in order to group and prioritize them. Also, to have the AERC become more 
involved in those high level initiatives that needed additional impetus. 

Major groupings identified are: 

• Requirements ~ Industrial Base, Technology Demonstrations, Operational Need, Concept Formulation 

• $ - Budget, PPBES (Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System) 

• Procurement ~ Solicitations, Contracts, Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), Evaluation and Award. 

• Acquisition Management ~ Modeling and Simulation, Test and Evaluation, Process Reviews. 

• Contract Management 

• Training 

In addition to the major groupings, initiatives were assigned priorities: PUSH — AERC involvement and 
assistance required; SUPPORT -- Implementation and maintenance of initiatives. 

The listing and matrix were presented and discussed during two AERC meetings (August-September 1994) 
dedicated to this effort. A listing of the "top-ten" was finally identified for further action by the lead office and 
the AERC members. 

Acquisition Improvement Initiatives Prioritization Top Ten 

Requirements Technology, Opportunities-Leveraging Technologies/WRAP 

$ Certified Cost & Pricing 

Procurement Implementation of DOD Report on Mil 

Spare Parts Management (JIT/DVD) 
Acquisition Management Acquisition Organization 

Develop Acquisition Reform Metrics (Ind/Govt) 

Acquisition Modeling & Simulation Implementation Plan 

Industrial Sector Surveys 
Contract Management Partnering 

Training Roadshow IV (Best Value/Military Specifications & Standards) 

Design to Cost (PTC) 

DTC is used as an engineering cost control effort for controlling production and operating/support costs 
through the judicious use of optimal design considerations. The DODI 5000.2 (Defense Acquisition Management 
and Procedures) requires DTC to be applied to the development of acquisition category (ACAT) I programs. Its 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

application for ACAT II-IV programs is optional at the discretion of the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). 
The DODI 5000.2 and DA PAM 70-3 (Army Acquisition Procedures) (both Part 6-K) provide regulatory and 
procedural guidance respectively for the DTC program. Publication is expected 1 December 1994. Major 
program events that occurred during year included: 

• Coordination with HQDA has been ongoing to ensure the acquisition concerns of HQDA relating to the 
oversight of the DTC process are met. Among major issues currently receiving consideration are: the correct 
insertion of the Operating and Support (O&S) requirement in the DTC effort; and improved participation by the 
PEO field community in getting new and existing DTC system applications on contract. 

• Because DTC is a DOD manadated program, DTC awareness training is being pursued. Our application to 
make the one-week DTC course part of the curriculum at the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) is waiting 
for a final decision that will allow the offering to be taught at the Defense Systems Management College 

• DTC videoconferences continued to be given to DTC coordinators, PEO personnel, and other specialists at 
the commodity commands involved in the DTC effort. Among major issues covered are a "Lessons Learned" 
package of experience on DTC operations at their command which would assist other commands in their DTC 

• The Army implementation of the "Blueprint for Change" limits the use of Military Specifications and 
Standards. Therefore, MIL-STD-337 "Design to Cost," will be converted to a handbook. 

Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) 

The objective of the E3 program is to ensure that new systems are designed and built to operate, without any 
mission degradation, in their intended operational environment. It is equally important to ensure that those E3 
design features built into a system are properly monitored and maintained throughout the system's life cycle. 

A single E3 "focal point" remains in the Systems Management Policy Division to provide for the 
development of policy and oversight management of the Army E3 program. The focal point continues to serve 
as the E3 program advisor to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition) 
(ASA(PvDA)). He also functions as chairman of the Army E3 Board, composed of members from MSCs, proving 
grounds, (research, development and engineering centers), and laboratories. 

The focal point's role increased greatly with the dissolution of the E3 General Officer Review Council 
(GORC) in April 1993 and the chartering of the E3 Steering Group. This new body, chaired by HQ AMC, will 
handle all of the program management functions previously accomplished by the GORC. 

Major program events that occurred during the year included: 

• The first Joint E3 Program Review, was held from 28 February-4 March 1 994. Over 200 personnel, ranging 
from all the Military Services, several Defense agencies, the OSD and JCS staff, attended. Discussion topics 
ranged from overview briefings of the Service programs to in-depth presentations and discussions on several E3 
issues (the role of simulation vs. testing in acquisition, E3 training requirements (operational/acquisition), 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

spectrum management, life cycle surveillance and maintenance, problem reporting and investigation, and the 
implication of Non-Developmental Item/Commercial Off-The-Shelf (NDI/COTS) acquisition strategies). 

• The Army E3 Board and Steering Group Conference was held from 28-30 June 1994 at HQ AMC. This 
conference represented the first meeting of the Army E3 Board since it was chartered on 8 November 1989 by 
Mr. Milton H. Hamilton, Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army. The Board is chaired by HQ 
AMC and includes membership from HQDA, Army MACOMs and AMC MSCs. The objective of the 
conference was to review the E3 process and management evolution, set the agenda for the next two to three years 
and derive a plan of action. Topics of discussion included: 

E3 Process Definition Joint Spectrum Center 

Standardization Non-Developmental Items 

Simulation vs. Testing Technology Development 

E3 in the Battle Labs Criteria and Requirements 

Assessment and Evaluation Risk Assessment 

Following an extensive review and discussion, the Board assigned action items to address several of the 
systems E3 problems which will form the basis for an action plan. 

• A major action related to the establishment of a Joint Spectrum Center (JSC) began in FY94 and will 
continue into FY95. The ASD(C3I) directed the establishment of the JSC which would consolidate the various 
Service spectrum management and E3 functions. Significant effort was expended this FY in addressing numerous 
issues related to the establishment of such an activity and its impact (good or bad) on the ability of the Army and 
AMC to execute its E3 mission. The AMC E3 'focal point" serves as the Army member of the DOD E3 Steering 
Committee which is charged with developing an E3 Program Plan for the JSC. 

• The Army Research Laboratory (ARL) conducted a presentation on "Army E3 in the JSC" on 17 August 
1994 during the 16-18 August 1994 Army Spectrum Management Advisory Group (AS MAG) conference in 
Annapolis, MD. The briefing covered the AMC community perspective on the status of Army E3 activities 
relating to the JSC effort. 

• The AMC community also provided input to the Army Interference Resolution Program (AIRP) draft 
document dated June 1994 which defined the roles, responsibilities, and interference resolution procedures for 
the AIRP program. Since processing support by the Joint Electronic Warfare Center (JEWC) relating to DOD 
reports of radio frequency spectrum interference as part of the Meaconing, Intrusion, Jamming, and Interference 
(MUI) effort was terminated on 30 June 1992, the Army did not have an established program for managing and 
controlling interference problems. Increased use of the frequency spectrum for commercial products and services 
from emerging technologies demanded that the Army establish an AIRP to prevent and resolve harmful 
interference. The Army Spectrum Manager's Office requested that the Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis 
Center (ECAC) undertake a study to propose an AIRP. AMC community staffing surfaced the following 
significant issues relating to the document's content: the interference problem is not resolved; no role delineated 
for the Electronic Proving Ground (EPG), Fort Huachuca, Arizona; and not much detail was included in the 
content of the text. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

• Effort continues on completing long-term requirements emanating from an October 1993 E3 GORC decision 
to task AMC and Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) to develop training laydowns for technical 
personnel, Logistics Assistance Representatives (LARs), and matrix support engineers: 

• • The publication of an article covering the reporting of E3 incidents occurred in the April 1994 issue of 
PS Magazine. This periodical is a major Army monthly maintenance bulletin, which provides information to all 
soliders with unit maintenance and supply duties. All E3 stories appearing in the magazine will center on E3 
reporting/trouble-shooting, using the Total Army Maintenance Mangement System (TAMMS) as the basis for 

• • The "Lessons Learned" work from the published articles and all other training effort given to logistics, 
maintenance, and technical personnel will be continually refined to ensure it is relevant and updated to meet the 
needs of the E3 and Logistics Assistance Program (LAP) community. 

• A project whose effort covered a study to determine that E3 incident reporting on Army systems by the Army 
logistics and MSC community was meeting E3 program compliance requirements was completed in October 
1994. The study covered the period 15 January - 15 July 1994 using research related to the field E3 reports 
transmitted on Army systems through the vehicles of Quality Deficiency Reports (QDRs), Equipment Incident 
Reports (EIRs), and Test Incident Reports (TIRs). Although reporting was noted across a number of systems 
in different mission areas and E3 incident categories, further improvement needs to be made and sustained. The 
continued use of the published articles in PS Magazine transmitted to maintenance personnel, the Army "E3 
Awareness Program" previously distributed to 14 AMC logistics locations, and other training effort will allow 
this to be accomplished. 

Automation of the Statement of Work (SOW) 

The objective of the SOW automation project is to reduce cycle time and increase quality and accuracy. The 
AMCDCG-A signed a charter (25 February 1993) establishing a functional coordinating group (FCG) to design 
and develop an automated expert system for production and update of SOWs and associated documentation 
(Document Summary Lists (DSLs), Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) and Contract Data Requirement Lists 
(CDRLs). This will aid the SOW preparer and other staff who must review, edit and enhance the SOW. 

The FCG identified the functional and resource requirements for the development and maintenance for the 
automated SOW expert system. Significant program events that occurred during FY94 included: 

• On-site visits at ARDEC and CECOM with LOGS A representative, 8-10 November 1993 to provide 
assistance in knowledge base development and a demo of a Windows-PC based prototype for SOW generation. 
Similar activity took place at ATCOM and TACOM, 30 November-2 December 1993. 

• Limited prototype demo at Information Management Users Group Conference, 16-17 February 1994, 
Huntsville, Alabama. 

• A FCG meeting was held at HQ AMC, 21-22 April 1994 to address a baseline for the knowledge base and 
initiate Integrated Definition Language (IDEF) modeling for process improvement. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

Popular Names of Major Items of Equipment 

A popular name may be assigned to a major item of equipment for use in publicizing the item and for ready 
reference identification. 

Requests for assignment of popular names for major items of Army equipment are submitted by the 
proposing agency to HQ AMC, Systems Management Policy Division, for processing (i.e., request for trademark 
search, coordination with other military departments, etc.). They are forwarded to the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition) (OAS A(RDA)) for HQDA coordination and 
approval. Requests for popular names for aerospace vehicles are then forwarded through the Department of the 
Air Force to the Office of the Secretary of Defense for approval. 

During 1994, HQ AMC processed five requests for popular names. The popular name "GRIZZLY" was 
approved for the Breacher and the popular name "WOLVERINE" was approved for the Heavy Assault Bridge 
in July 1994. The popular name "CRUSADER" was approved for the Advanced Field Artillery System in 
October 1994. Approval is pending for popular name for the Improved Recovery Vehicle, and a change for 
previously approved popular name for the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle-Short Range. 

Nondevelopmental Item (NDI) Advocacy 

The primary objective of NDI advocacy is to increase the use of commercial and other NDI acquisitions by: 

• Challenging barriers to NDI usage. 

• Reviewing procurement activities to ensure full consideration of the NDI option. 

• Recommending to the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) policies and actions that would enhance NDI 

• Facilitating NDI training. 

In 1994, the AAE appointed Dr. Kenneth J. Oscar as the Army NDI Advocate, replacing Mr. Darold Griffin, 
who retired. Two of the associate advocates also changed. Mr. Arthur Adlam replaced Mr. Ingersoll as the 
TACOM NDI Associate Advocate and Dr. Larry O. Daniel replaced Dr. Jacobs at MICOM. 

The year also saw the second iteration of NDI acquisition measurement. The field reported obligation of 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) and Procurement dollars for commercial/NDI as 
compared to total obligations. Reporting covered acquisition category (ACAT) I, II, and III programs in FY93. 
Percentages for all services follow: 















Air Force 






Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

Eight Army sites (207 students) received NDI acquisition training. This was funded through the Defense 
Acquisition University and coordinated by the Systems Management Policy Division for the NDI Advocate. 

Section 8303 of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 states that the advocate for competition 
at each procuring activity shall be responsible for promoting the acquisition of commercial items and challenging 
barriers to such acquisition. This will probably impact on the network of associate advocates. 

Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT) 

The MANPRINT program seeks to ensure implementation of Soldier-in-the-loop considerations through 
judicious use of the human integration aspects into materiel design. The program implements the policy and 
guidance in the DOD 5000 series (Defense Acquisition), AR 70-1 (Army Acquisition Policy), AR 602-2 
(Manprint in the Systems Acquisition Process), and DA PAM 70-3 (Army Acquisition Procedures). The overall 
guidance for the redraft of AR 602-2 (in printing) was to minimize requirements and provide procedural guidance 
in DA Pam 70-3 or the Users Source Guide. 

The HQDA designated lead for the new MANPRINT domain of soldier survivability, ARL-SLAD 
Integration Office, will provide input to the MANPRINT courses. To aid in the education process, a 
videoconference was held on 17 March 1994 to deal primarily with the management of MANPRINT for AC AT 
III and IV programs. A 28 April 1 994 meeting was held at HQ AMC to address the assessments for soldier 

Status of DA Pamphlet 70-3. Army Acquisition Procedures 

DA PAM 70-3 will provide readily understandable "how to" guidance covering all aspects of the materiel 
acquisition life cycle. In accordance with DOD policy, this pamphlet is advisory in nature, not directive. It is 
aligned with DODI 5000.2 "Defense Acquisition Management Policies and Procedures" and includes additional 
Army-specific sections. This pamphlet is not a stand alone document and must be used/reviewed in conjunction 
with DODD 5000.1 "Defense Acquisition," DODI 5000.2, DODI 5000.2-M "Defense Acquisition Management 
Documentation and Reports," and AR 70-1 "Army Acquisition Policy." 

The Systems Management Policy Division is the HQ AMC focal point for the preparation of DA PAM 70-3. 
This effort is sponsored by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and 
Acquisition) (OASA(RDA)) and requires support by HQDA and AMC subject matter experts. The draft was 
staffed in 1992. HQ AMC completed the second draft and OASA(RDA) staffed it in November 1993. HQ AMC 
completed the following actions to prepare the pamphlet for final publication: 

• Reviewed all comments from the field on the second draft and distributed them to the appropriate section 
proponent for consideration and incorporation. 

• Reviewed all revised sections, resolving issues directly with section proponents, and putting each section in 
special format. 

• Pursued deviation from Army standard format. Prepared justification and received waiver from DISC4. Met 
with Army Publications and Printing Command to discuss special format. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

• Prepared the pre-publication version and delivered it to OASA(RDA) for submission to Army Publications 
and Printing Command. 

This office will continue to work with OAS A(RDA), SARD-RP, to expedite publication of DA PAM 70-3. 

AMC Focal Point for Matrix Supp ort 

A transfer of the AMC Focal Point for matrix support from AMCRD to AMCAQ occurred in April 1994. 
The Systems Management Policy Division became the office responsible for matrix support policy issues. The 
Acquisition Support Office assumed duties relating to specific issues on matrix support and system 
transition/ termination. 


Waiver to the Secondary Arab Boycott of Israel 

Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command (AMCAQ-K) forwarded a request for a class waiver to the U.S. 
Army Contract Support Agency requesting relief of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 
(DFARS) 225.770-1 for all Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts anticipated for award to Saudi Arabian firms 
in FY94. This DFARS restriction requires foreign firms to certify that they are not participating in the Secondary 
Arab Boycott of Israel. Saudi Arabian firms cannot make this certification, except under penalty of local law. 
The impact of this law is that it would have effectively prevented award of millions of dollars in FMS contracts 
if the waiver had not been granted. Significant actions occurring in FY94 included: 

• AMCAQ obtained a projection from Program Manager, Saudi Arabian National Guard, the U.S. Army 
Communications-Electronics Command and the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command of applicable awards 
planned for FY94. This information was used as a justification for obtaining the required waiver. 

• On 27 October 1993, the Honorable William J. Perry, Office of the Secretary of Defense approved the class 

Activity Based Costing (ABC) 

ABC was approved for implementation as a management tool in the 1 1 March 1994 Blueprint for Change 
Report signed by Mr. Deutch, Deputy Secretary of Defense. 

ABC captures and allocates costs more accurately than other broad-based accounting systems. Use of ABC 
would allow DOD and industry management to make decisions such as eliminating non-value-added cost drivers 
and the cost of excess capacity. 

AMC conducted a 'Proof of Principle" test to support the use of ABC to identify and quantify costs 
associated with doing business with the government. The test included application of ABC techniques at six 
government-industry activities: Textron Lycoming, Radford, Scranton, Watervliet, United Defense, and SACO 
Defense. This study was limited in scope and detail, however. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

The Office of the Secretary of Defense recently sponsored a series of ABC Studies at 10 defense contractors. 
The OSD studies are scheduled for completion in mid-November, and the report should be available for 
evaluation shortly after. 

A more comprehensive study was recently completed at Raytheon Missiles Systems Plant (Andover Facility). 
The consultant firm KPMG Peat Marwick will brief HQ AMC (Dr. Oscar) on the results on 9 December 1994. 
Preliminary results look encouraging. 

HQ AMC feels it is prudent and necessary to contract for at least one more study of a defense contractor who 
performs both commercial and DOD work. The command is currently pursuing this. 

If the results of the study clearly indicate those unique defense regulations that contribute to non-competitive 
rates, HQ AMC will meet with the MSCs, PEOs, PMs and functional specialists to seek alternatives. 

Some of the MSCs are currently encouraging the contractors at Government Owned-Company Operated 
(GOCO) facilities to propose accounting system changes to allow dual use overhead rates which could better able 
them to compete for commercial work. 

Status of ABC studies will be briefed at the Spring, 1995, Atlanta XXI Conference. 

Implementation of solutions will require changes in how the government and industry conduct future 
business: i.e., accounting and charging of costs, identifying non-value-added costs, identifying and segregating 
the hidden cost of warm base capacity and determining actual unit production cost. 


Technical Industrial Liaison Office (TILO) 

The TILO is regulated by AR 70-35, outlined in chapter 2, para 2-1 . The HQ AMC TILO serves as AMC's 
information for industry point of contact (POC), and coordinator for AMC's 10 other TILOs. This office is 
responsible for disseminating releasable Materiel Requirement Documents (MRD) to industry for all Army 
programs/interests via agreement between AMC and TRADOC. 

The HQ, TILO has gone through a change in personnel over the last 2 years, and operation of the office 
nearly ceased. During May of this fiscal year, this office again changed hands and went through the process of 
redefining office procedure in an attempt to better interface with industry. Contractor visits increased 75 percent 
due to advertisement of the services and information available through the TILO; 

• notices are posted in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD). 

• TILO attendance at government/industry conferences and symposiums. 

• TILO newsletter was established which is being published quarterly and placed on the AMC Acquisition 
Bulletin Board, as is the Advance Planning Briefings for Industry (APBI) Master Schedule, allowing for wider 
industry accessibility. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

The first TILO Conference was held in late August at AMC. Attendees included representatives from the 
1 1 TILOs, representatives from the Air Force, Navy, Special Operations Command and the Defense Technical 
Information Center. This was the first opportunity the TILOs had to meet with one another, exchange ideas and 
discuss problems that were jointly shared. It was also a great benefit to have our counterparts from the other 
services there to offer suggestions. 

To further enhance our interaction with industry and ensure that information AMCAQ provides is current, 
this office has established an informal network with personnel at the TRADOC schools which are the proponents 
for all MRDs. The TILO is also on their E-mail distribution which gives us advance notice to new requirements 
being written as well as those that are currently approved, better enabling us to service the industrial community. 

Contracted Advisory & Assistance Services (CAASVContracted Consulting Services (CCS). 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) promulgated several policy changes in FY94 which affected the 
way AMC contracts for services. An Office of Federal Procurement Policy review of policies and procedures for 
service contracting resulted in the rescission of OMB Circular No. A- 120, Guidelines for the Use of Advisory 
and Assistance Services. Guidance in the Circular was revised and incorporated into OMB Policy Letter No. 
93-1, Management Oversight of Service Contracting, and other appropriate policy documents to eliminate 
conflicting definitions and other potentially confusing areas. Since some of the major problems identified in the 
area of service contracting associated primarily with the use of contracts for consulting services (i.e., advisory 
and assistance services), the Department of the Army directed implementation of the requirement to manage 
"consulting services." Consulting services are managed under the provisions of AR 5-14 and consist of three 
categories: Studies, Analyses, and Evaluations (AR 5-5); Management and Professional Support Services (AR 
5-14); and Engineering and Technical Support Services (AR 700-4). Consulting services include services 
performed by Federally Funded Research and Development Centers. AMC reported $99M for consulting services 
in the FY94 Budget Program Resource Review (BPRR). 


Organization. Mission and Manpower 

The primary division mission in FY94 focused on the conduct of acquisition management reviews of several 
major subordinate commands and activities within AMC to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
contracting operations. The other significant mission focused on conducting business clearance reviews for 
several AMC procurements to evaluate cost and business planning. The goal was to maintain a high level of 
confidence in the contract pricing function to ensure best value contract negotiations. 

Other significant division missions completed by the division covered: 

• Providing HQ AMC representation at the source selection evaluation boards and source selection advisory 

• Serving as HQDA representatives at overhead strategy program and cost principles committees. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

• Supporting the Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting (PARC) functions for the Program Manager 
- Saudi Arabian National Guard (PM-SANG), and Armed Forces Radio and Television Broadcast Center 

• Conducting reviews of Justification and Approvals (J&As) in support of HQDA approval process. 

Key Personnel 

Mr. Edwin Cornett served as division chief, with Messrs. Vick White and Wayne Avery providing relief 
during his absence. The division experienced a net loss of seven personnel. These losses might impact on the 
accomplishment of the primary division missions. At the start of FY94, the division had authorized and on-board 
strengths of 20 spaces (3 military and 17 civilians). At the close of FY94, the division had authorized and 
on-board strengths of 12 spaces (1 military and 1 1 civilians). 

Procurement Management Reviews (PMRs) 

This program fulfills the Headquarters responsibility of ensuring the efficient operation of field contracting 
organizations through a series of team visits. Due to resource constraints and the need to establish management 
responsibility at the lowest practicable level, the program underwent a major restructuring this year. 

The basic goal of the PMRs remained unchanged: the DCS, Acquisition evaluates each contracting operation 
including policies, procedures, management of the PARC function, and quality of individual contracts. AMCAQ 
then provides feedback including both recommendations for improvement and positive reinforcement for things 
that are being done notably well. The changes to the program that were made are as follows: 

Headquarters reviews will be done only for direct reporting activities including Major Subordinate 
Commands (MSCs) and activities for which AMCAQ is Head of Contracting Activity (HCA). The DCS will 
no longer review second-level subordinate activities, except as an occasional augmentation to an MSC-led team. 

MSCs are expected to review their subordinate commands on a regular schedule, which is to be provided to 
the Assessment and Evaluation Division annually. Review of the MSCs PMR program will be a major item on 
our review of them. 

The number of areas AMCAQ looks at will be limited, and areas will be selected on a rotating basis from 
a list of high-payoff review topics. 

Reviews will be done on a three-year, instead of a two-year cycle (except for HCA activities, which will still 
be 1 8 months). 

Desk audits— review of policies, statistics, etc., are done before the team travels. This is done to limit the 
duration of the review and number of team members needed. 

Reports are to be streamlined and provided promptly. Any major issues they raise should reflect only matters 
that were raised during the outbrief. 

The new procedure was briefed to the Chief of Staff, AMC, who approved it. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

This command conducted two PMRs during FY94. They were: 

• U.S. Army Missile Command (MICOM) 

• U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (TECOM) 

The TECOM review was the first done according to the new system, and was very successful. 
Reviews scheduled for FY95 are as follows: 

• U.S. Army Chemical and Biological Defense Command, October 1994. 

• U.S. Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Command, December 1994. 

• PM, Saudi Arabian National Guard, February 1995. 

• U.S. Army Aviation and Troop Command, Apr 95. 

• U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command, Jun 95. 

Joint Logistics Commanders' Acquisition Initiatives Working Group 

This is a group chartered to research specific topics in acquisition, report to the JLC, and make 
recommendations for joint action, where appropriate. It also hosts semiannual forums on current acquisition 
topics and publishes a catalog annually of acquisition initiatives from all services. 

Topics under study this year included expansion of the concept of evolutionary acquisition, blue-ribbon 
contractor programs, best value subcontracting applications and early industry involvement. Recommendations 
on evolutionary acquisition and best value have been forwarded to DOD for action. 

The two FY 94 forums were held in November 1993 and May 1994. On behalf of the Army, AMC hosted 
the May forum, which focused on Major Services Contracting. The November forum was hosted by the Air 
Force, with the topic of Paper-less Acquisitions. The next scheduled forum will be in November 1995, hosted 
by DLA, and focus on the services' contracting structures as they relate to the post-award function. 

HO AMC Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) 

During FY94, the Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition and Contracting, Mr. Gary A. Tull, served 
as the HCA for the Office of the Program Manager, Saudi Arabian National Guard Modernization (OPM-S ANG) 
and the Armed Forces Radio and Television Broadcast Center (AFRTS-BC). 

The HCA appointed the Acting Chief, Assessment and Evaluation Division, Mr. Edwin Comett, Principle 
Assistant Responsible for Contracting (PARC). 

The HCA has broad authority to manage contracting functions and responsibility for ensuring adequacy of 
organizational structure, staffing, and training programs. The PARC performs delegable functions for the HCA. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

Our oversight and approval actions of the two HCA activities during the year included: an OPM-SANG 
requested on-site review of the training and support services RFP, review of BCMs, award approvals, assistance 
on specific problems, and appointment of contracting officers and Award Fee Determining Officials. 

No Procurement Management Reviews were conducted at these activities during FY94. 

HCA responsibility for AFRTS, a non-AMC activity, transferred to the Defense Logistics Agency, 1 October 

USASAC Supp ort 

This Division provides "on-call" support to USASAC by providing advice and assistance and attending 
USASAC bi-weekly staff meetings. Advice and assistance consists primarily of research and interpretation of 
contracting regulations related to Foreign Military Sales issues. AMCAQ has been heavily involved in the 
resolution of AMC Saudi Arabia Major Systems Office contracting issues including the transfer of contract 
administration services to Defense Contract Management Command (established in Saudi Arabia this year) and 
"disestablishing" the Office. 

Secure Environment Contracting (SEC) 

The division provided the leadership and chaired the AMC/DA feasibility study group for consolidation of 
AMC Secure Environment Contracting (SEC) operations. The fully staffed concept plan was approved by CG 
and forwarded to DA for approval. Due to manpower downsizing, DA declined to implement. 

Designated personnel of the division with appropriate security clearances: 

• Served on Special Access Program Oversight Committee (SAPOC) as voting member in reviews of several 
special access programs. 

• Served as procurement representative on Special Access Program Staff Assistance Team (SAPSAT) visits 
to two MSCs. 

• Served as AMC's procurement member of DA Procurement Management Review (PMR) of SEC activities 
at two AMC MSCs. 

• Participated in review/revision of AR 7 1 5-30, SEC. 

Business Clearance Reviews (BCRs). 

A primary mission of this division is to review Business Clearance Memorandums (BCMs) to ensure that 
a high level of quality and consistency with all applicable regulations is maintained. The BCM must set forth 
the rationale for the procurement and the Contracting Officer's negotiation position, demonstrate sound business 
acumen, and represent a fair and reasonable price. That mission was achieved through an orderly approach by: 

• Evaluation of negotiation objectives, statement of work, delivery schedules, special contract clauses, analysis 
of cost objectives and determination of the adequacy of profit/fee. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

• Evaluation of pre-negotiation and post-negotiation BCMs for adequacy of detail and rationale for negotiated 
settlement, depth of analysis, rationale for variance from DCAA audit position and accomplishment of 
negotiation objectives. 

FY94 represented the first full year of operation under the revised procedure of sampling BCMs in lieu of 
a mandatory review of all clearances that met the threshold. During FY94, a total of 16 BCMs throughout the 
AMC community were selected for review. The process provided the Deputy Chief of Staff with an overview 
of how effectively the MSCs are discharging their responsibilities without imposing an undue burden on 

Overhead Strategy Program Committee 

This division provided two members to represent the Department of the Army on a DCMC led 
multi-disciplined process action team (PAT) comprised of members from all services and OSD to resolve 
problems within the pricing/overhead arena. Four discrete mini-teams were formed within the PAT to address 
the problem issues identified by the PAT. 

• Forward Pricing Rate Analysis and Negotiation Process Team identified corrective measures to 
improve/shorten the process of providing forward pricing rates to buying activities. 

• Cost Monitoring Functional Review Process Team determined criteria for performing overhead in-depth 
reviews, and developed metrics for measuring overhead and collection methods for capturing reductions in 
overhead cost. 

• Indirect Cost Monitoring Guidebook Process Team developed a "Guide for Monitoring Contractor's Indirect 

• Communication Network Process Team established a communication network for the exchange and use of 
overhead information. 

Numerous meetings were held throughout the year and around the country as the teams worked to compile 
information, analyze responses from buying activities and develop proposed solutions to problems. The DCMC 
published their summary report in June 1994 entitled "New Directions in DCMC Pricing" which this division 
provided to AMC buying commands. This compendium of the Teams' effort results in improving customer 
relations by providing improved procedures and more effective communication. Additionally, this division 
provided specific recommendations to both DCMC and buying offices on methods and processes to enhance their 
ability to provide quality pricing reports. 

1 150 Career Management 

AMCAQ-E provided assistance in the career management of Industrial Specialist (1 1 50 Career Series), and 
Manufacturing, Production, and Quality Assurance (MP&QE) functional areas. Significant events occurring in 
FY94 include: 

• The review of required skills for Industrial Specialists. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAQ 

• The division continues to monitor the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) experiment to combine functions 
of the 1 150 and 1910 career series. A Memorandum of Agreement was implemented to facilitate 1 150/1910 
cross training with DLA. 

Coordination with DLA/DCMC 

This division, in coordination with DLA and DCMC, with periodic meetings a common occurrence, addressed 
issues of mutual concern among the buying commands and the area offices that administer the contracts. Issues 
of the buying activities for which improvements were requested include: 

• timeliness and quality of pre-award surveys. 

• Reliability of data in the Mechanization of Contract Administration Services (MOCAS) data base to reduce 
surveillance on contracts assigned a priority designator code A. 

• Data collection on past performance to support Performance Risk Analysis Group evaluation in source 

• Timely notification of anticipated delivery delays. 

• Management of government property in the hands of a contractor. 

DLA/DCAA Supp ort 

The division negotiated a policy position with DCAA and DODIG on how to process and accept cost claims 
submitted by contractors against the government. A checklist, "Screening Checklist, Equitable Adjustment 
Submission," was developed. This checklist provides guidance to all AMC contracting personnel in screening 
adequacy of contractor claims for equitable adjustment. The checklist identifies inadequately supported 
submissions before committing resources to review and audit of the claim. Copies of the checklist were 
distributed to all AMC contracting activities. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

Organization and Key Personnel 

At the end of Fiscal Year 1 994, the AMCAM had 
an employee strength of 5 military officers and 45 
civilians. Key personnel in this period were as 
follows: ' 

Ammunition Functional Area Assessment (FAA) 

The most significant ammunition activity of 
FY94 was the Functional Area Assessment on the 
ammunition stockpile. The stockpile's condition and 
the reduction of resources for its modernization, 
procurement, production base and maintenance were 
a growing concern. On 19 October 1993, the Army 
Chief of Staff directed a Functional Area Assessment 
for ammunition. 

Headquarters, AMC and its ammunition major subordinate commands, conducted an abbreviated ammunition 
FAA. They worked with the Army ODCSOPS (Office of the DCS for Operations) and PA&E (Program Analysis 
and Evaluation). The FAA process confirmed that the Army has sufficient ammunition to support two nearly 
simultaneous Major Regional Contingencies. However, the FAA also recognized conditions that could lead to 
reduced ammunition readiness by the turn of the century. Those conditions are the following: the changing 
worldwide geopolitical environment; reduced military force structure; decreased ammunition Operation and 
Maintenance, Army (OMA); reduced Procurement of Ammunition, Army (PAA); increased costs of 
modernization; saturation of the Wholesale Ammunition Storage Base; and the declining health of the industrial 
base. The FAA recommended corrective actions to ensure continued ammunition readiness. The Army's Chief 
of Staff and Vice Chief of Staff approved the FAA with slight modifications. 

Since the FAA's approval, the Army included the vast majority of the corrective actions in POM (Program 
Objective Memorandum) 96-2001. 

Army, DOD, and Congressional staff quickly recognized the FAA document as the cornerstone for building 
a smaller, safer ammunition stockpile. It would have fewer installations and less manpower while still enhancing 
the Army's ammunition readiness. The FAA has led to an understanding and appreciation of ammunition's 
criticality to the Army's readiness. It also shows just how fragile and susceptible to outside influences that 
readiness has become. 




DCS for Ammunition 

BG William R. Holmes 

01 Jul 92 

ADCS for Ammunition 

Mr. James Hill 

20 Sep 92 

Executive Officer 

Ms. Lois Longo (Succeeded: 
CPT J. David Thompson, who 
departed on 01 Dec 93) 

26 Dec 93 

Administrative Officer 

Ms. Lenora Uhrig (Succeeded: 
Mr. Marion C. Shoop, who 
departed on 09 Oct 93) 

31 Oct 93 

Chief, Integration 

Mr. John Lawson 

15 Dec 92 


Chief, Logistics 

Mr. Larry Gulledge 

01 Oct 92 


Chief, Planning and 

Mr. Robert Grubenmann 

29 Dec 91 


Division Chief, 

COL Thomas M. Tobin 

01 Jul 94 

Programs and 

(Succeeded: LTC Joseph 

Production Division 

Albright, who departed on 15 
Jul 94) 

Congressional Liaison 

Mr. William Gilhooley (new 

24 Jul 94 



'Unless otherwise noted, information in this section was taken from the DCS for Ammunition FY94 
Historical Submission. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 


Integration Office - General 

The Integration Office provided liaison support to the DCS for Ammunition in the Pentagon. It also acted 
as Deputy for Ammunition, the DCS for Ammunition's role in the Pentagon. The Deputy for Ammunition serves 
under the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition) (SARD A). 

Research and Development Descriptive Summaries 

The Integration Office consolidated field information, prepared, and staffed the Descriptive Summaries for 
ammunition programs. These helped support the Fiscal Year (FY) 1995 President's Budget and the FY 1996-7 
Budget Estimate Submission (BES). 

ASA(RDAVASA(FM) Execution Review 

The Integration Office coordinated the ammunition portion of the Fiscal Year 1994 execution review. The 
review resulted in the identification of excess funds that were applied to high priority unfunded ammunition items 
in the FY 1994 Omnibus Reprogramming. 


Ammunition Logistics Division - Missions and Organization 

The Ammunition Logistics Division continued the reorganization efforts begun in Fiscal Year 1993 by 
approving three employees for Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) and participating in three transfers 
to level the AMC headquarters staff (one GS-14 and one GS-13 into the organization and one GS-1 1 out of the 
organization). These actions were completed while continuing to perform ammunition logistics missions such as 
management of prepositioned ships; Army reserve stocks; conventional ammunition demilitarization; Single 
Manager for Conventional Ammunition (SMCA) maintenance; demilitarization research and development; 
Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA) budget management, and explosive safety, supply and transportation 
functions. One of the incoming positions is filled by an individual on worker's compensation, thereby stressing 
the organizations ability to level the logistics workload. Areas negatively impacted have been Base Realignment 
and Closures (BRAC), inventory, and storage issues and functions. 

Conventional Ammunition Demilitarization 

On 30 September 1993, the conventional ammunition demilitarization stockpile consisted of 413,000 short 
tons. Funding during Fiscal Year 1994 was $70.468M and enabled the Conventional Ammunition 
Demilitarization Program to process 59,248 short tons (s/tons) ~ 

• U.S. Army Industrial Operations Command ~ 45,196 s/tons (destroyed or recycled, reclaimed, or reused). 

• U.S. Army, Europe — 1 1 ,355 s/tons (contracted for disposal). 

• U.S. Army, Pacific — 2,697 s/tons (destroyed or recycled). 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

These actions, in conjunction with sales from and weight corrections to the conventional ammunition 
demilitarization account, enabled U.S. Army Materiel Command to reduce the conventional ammunition stockpile 
to approximately 340,000 s/tons by 30 September 1994. Disposing of unserviceable, obsolete and excess 
ammunition in the stockpile eliminates explosive safety hazards, clears needed storage space for serviceable war 
reserve ammunition and permits greater options for the storage and strategic positioning of contingency 
ammunition stocks. 

Demilitarization Research and Development 

Current ammunition demilitarization relies heavily on open burning/open detonation (OB/OD). Congress, 
environmental regulators, and the public have indicated that continued reliance on OB/OD as a primary method 
of demilitarization is environmentally unacceptable. U.S. Army Materiel Command is exploring various 
technologies as alternatives to OB/OD such as plasma arc furnace and super-critical water oxidation. Other 
technologies focus on resource recovery and reuse (R-3) as alternatives to destruction. 

However, research and development (R&D) of these technologies has been severely restrained by funding 
shortfalls. In Fiscal Year 1994, Congress, recognizing the need for a vigorous R&D program, appropriated 
$10.770M for conventional ammunition demilitarization. However, only $542K was actually available in Fiscal 
Year 1994, permitting minimal R&D accomplishments in the recycling of red phosphorus and carbon dioxide 
blast-out. The remaining funds were initially offered up as part of the omnibus reprogramming effort and were 
not available for release until Fiscal Year 1995. As a result, the development of many promising programs have 
slipped into Fiscal Year 1995. 

Ammunition Maintenance 

Ammunition maintenance consists of all actions necessary to retain ammunition in, or restore it to, a full 
mission capable condition. Maintenance is performed on ammunition required for stockpile use that is 
unserviceable or suspended. Ammunition requiring maintenance falls into two broad categories: 

• Ammunition that has been affected by environmental conditions may require preservation and packaging 
such as re-palletizing, repacking, cleaning, rust removal, painting and remarking. 

• Ammunition affected by functional shortcomings or technology may require complex renovation, replacement 
of components in a controlled condition. 

In order to accomplish ammunition maintenance on currently generated unserviceable ammunition, a funding 
requirement was submitted for Fiscal Year 1 994. The required amount was $ 1 4.88M. The budget execution was 
for $2.02M with a shortfall of $ 1 2.86M. The $2.02M was disbursed in the execution of Army - Single Manager 
for Conventional Ammunition (SMCA) non-reimbursable programs. The Army also executed $4.5M 
maintenance program for the services on service reimbursable assets. Total Army-SMCA maintenance execution 
was $6.52 million dollars. 

Ammunition maintenance for Army-SMCA non-reimbursable programs was accomplished using a priority 
system. Only those programs that were identified as being priority 1 or 2 were accomplished. Ammunition in 
programs identified as priority 1 or 2 were in very short supply (ready for issue). All other maintenance programs 
were reprogrammed to Fiscal Year 1995. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

As downsizing of the U.S. Army continues and procurement of ammunition declines, a greater reliance on 
maintenance programs will be required to meet established readiness goals. On hand assets to satisfy 
requirements for training and war reserve will need to be maintained in a ready for issue condition. Ready for 
issue condition will require stable and adequate funding for maintenance. 

Fiscal Year 1994 Ammunition Operations and Maintenance Army (OMA) Funding 

The Ammunition Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA) funding program in Fiscal Year 1994 was 
expected to support a worldwide wholesale stockpile of over 2.5M short tons of ammunition. The program 
includes supply management (receipt and issue) storage, stockpile reliability, logistics administrative support, 
National Inventory Control Point (NICP) operations, National Maintenance Point (NMP) operations, (Care of 
Supplies in Storage (COSIS) and renovation) and maintenance engineering support. The single stockpile of 
ammunition approaching 3M short tons in CONUS is fast approaching maximum CONUS storage capacity. The 
stockpile's major components are, go to war stocks for power projection, ammunition to meet training 
requirements at OPTEMPO, and assets for disposal. 

During the year, AMCAM spent OMA dollars for moving ammunition to training sites and for ensuring 
power projection (i.e., maintaining the stockpile in a ready to go to war status). The DCS funded training at 
OPTEMPO levels as directed by the Vice Chief of Staff, USA. This required that AMCAM conduct shipping 
and receiving, at the expense of dollars allocated for power projection. More dollars were spent supporting 
mission accomplishment at the expense of serviceability of the stockpile. 

The Cold War stockpile is far more than the Army needs, generating large annual costs for storage. 
AMCAM returned large amounts of ammunition from overseas to CONUS which will eventually force us to 
spend more dollars on power projection, (re-warehousing, inventory, maintenance, surveillance, and 
transportation). AMCAM's critical funded dollars were mostly expended in support of power projection. 

Fiscal Year 1994 has proven to be a most challenging year for support of logistics operations. The decline 
in resources has not kept pace with the increases in workload. The movement of troops into Haiti and Kuwait 
has caused a dilemma for the ammunition logistics community. Program Budget Decisions (PBDs), 
implementation of Unit Cost, The Defense Business Operating Fund (DBOF), and other decisions by OSD and 
HQDA have led to major changes in the way AMCAM does business. 

Supply Depot Operations (SDO) continues to be an area of severe funding shortfalls. Although the U.S. 
Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command (AMCCOM) was able to fund shipping and receiving at 
OPTEMPO levels this year, it was at the expense of other programs such as Maintenance and Surveillance. 
Inventory was funded at the category I and II levels only; re-warehousing was unfunded (performed last year on 
year end funds). AMCCOM started the year with a critical shortfall of approximately $30M in Supply Depot 

European Retrograde (RETROEUR) 

The European retrograde program continued in FY94. U.S. Army, Europe (USAREUR) had retrograded 
more than 100,000 short tons as of 30 September 1994. Estimated ammunition retrograde shipments for Fiscal 
Year 1995: 60,000 s/tons. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

Prepositioned Ships 

In FY94 the U.S. Army Materiel Command was the executive agent for management and accountability of 
Army War Reserves 3 (AWR-3) - prepositioning afloat ~ as part of the Army's Strategic Mobility Program 
(ASMP). The program rapidly deploys and/or positions equipment for a heavy brigade for use during conflicts. 
The objective for the expanded afloat program is to employ an Army War Reserve (AWR) consisting of 17 ships 
acquired over 6 years. These ships carry critical common items and equipment strategically positioned, have 
global utility and support multiple Commander in Chief power projection requirements. The U.S. Army Depot 
System Command (DESCOM) is the responsible agent, with other AMC subordinate commands and field 
operating activities in support. 

The equipment on the three Lighter Aboard Ships (LASH), a Heavy Lift Prepo Ship (HLPS), and seven 
Roll-On/Roll-Off (RO/RO) was completed in February 1993. The reconstitution/maintenance cycles for the 
LASH, HLPS, and RO/RO have been scheduled. 

The Army will purchase four Large Medium Speed Ships (LMSS) to replace the seven RO/RO, which will 
decrease the deployment time. The program will be expanded up to 2.0 million square feet of unit and sustaining 
equipment including a heavy brigade (with a minimum of 1 20 tanks) by Fiscal Year 1997. The PREPO program 
of 17 ships will consist of the HLPS, LASH, Container Ships, LMSS and a Crane Ship. 

War Reserves 

The Army Chief of Staff policy change directing AMC to account for and manage all Army War Reserve 
munitions made the DCS for Ammunition deeply involved in planning and instituting the mission. Development 
of memorandums of understanding between AMC and previous accountable managers (other MACOMs) and 
the submission of budget and manpower requirements continues. 

Explosives Safety Test Management Program 

The Army Explosives Safety Test Management Program in Fiscal Year 1994 included nine specific 
explosives test projects. They were established to influence Army explosives safety policy. The applications 
related to defining DOD Hazard Division (HD) 1 .2 ammunition fragment distribution and HD 1 .3 ammunition 
reactions when subjected to confinement in storage. Personnel protection and explosives propagation were 
considered through testing of substantial 12-inch reinforced concrete dividing walls used in maintenance and 
production facilities. These were coordinated and managed by the U.S. Army Technical Center for Explosives 
Safety (USATCES) and conducted by organizations throughout the DOD. The results are being evaluated and 
will be presented to the newly chartered DOD Explosives Safety Testing Working Group for development of 
changes to the DOD Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards. 

Ammunition Surveillance 

During Fiscal Year 1994 two studies were completed on the use of new surveillance concepts ~ 

• AMCCOM discontinued the use of Ammunition Condition Reports at the wholesale level. During this period 
when the amount of inspections was very limited, they achieved a savings of $287K. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

• McAlester Army Ammunition Plant is using a work model that utilizes a matrix of workers to accomplish 
ammunition operations. This matrix of workers is made up of people from the different work units. 

This program will shift into a Phase II plan called Surveillance Refocus. This plan will study the team 
support concept and focus the surveillance program on the customer requirements. 


The DCS for Ammunition has designated one position (a Traffic Management Specialist) to be responsible 
for all transportation issues involving ammunition management, distribution, handling, shipment, 
containerization, tracking, visibility, security and safety characteristics. 

Many transportation issues surfaced during Fiscal Year 1994. Containerization problems, such as 
availability, repairs, location, and tracking, have been on-going and will require the DCS for Ammunition to work 
closely with AMCCOM, Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC), and the Department of the Army 
for resolution. Total Asset Visibility (TAV) is a major issue within the transportation arena. 

Continued monitoring of all transportation issues is essential. Budget and personnel cuts make it difficult to 
accomplish the many necessary actions needed to maintain a good transportation support program. 

Ammunition Environmental Issues 

In 1992, the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCA) was signed into law to amend the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and to clarify the compliance requirements for Federal Agencies. The 
law provided a complete waiver of sovereign immunity regarding Federal Agencies. All Federal installations are 
subject to federal and state environmental legislation. FFCA also allows states to be more stringent. The U.S. 
Army, as a federal agency, is subject to FFCA. All Army installations are subject to review, inspection, and visits 
by Regional Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and/or state regulators in order to verify compliance with 
environmental laws. 

In late 1993, each of the Services issued interim guidance on how to apply the FFCA. The Army, on 1 
November 1993, issued "Application of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous Waste 
Management Requirements to Conventional Explosive Ordnance Operations - Interim Policy and Guidance." 
This policy will remain in effect until the munitions rule is developed and becomes part of FFCA. 

Congress, in amending RCRA, required the EPA to consult with the Department of Defense (DOD) on any 
proposed munitions rule(s) that would become part of FFCA. A DOD group of personnel (with subject matter 
experts in logistics, demilitarization, legal, and environmental from all services) are busy at work developing 
language that is acceptable to the EPA, State Environmental Agencies, and environmental groups. Language 
must also be acceptable for mission accomplishment. Personnel from the U.S. Army Materiel Command's DCS 
for Ammunition and from the U.S. Army Industrial Operations Command (IOC) have been participating in this 
work group. The DOD language will be recommendations, since input to the rule will also come from the EPA 
itself, as well as from the states and interested environmental groups. 

Regardless of final language adopted for the munitions rule for the FFCA, the way of doing ammunition 
business will be altered. Some practices or processes will be adopted by the Army and the other Services because 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

it's good for the environment; but, many others will be adopted simply for rule compliance. A greater awareness 
of RCRA requirements is being realized. The permitting process for operating treatment sites (Open 
Burning/Open Detonation (OB/OD), incineration, etc.) will continue to be an expensive outlay of funds. 

Integrated Stockpile Management Plan 

Subsequent to the Ammunition Functional Area Assessment (FAA), the U.S. Army Materiel Command 
developed the Integrated Ammunition Stockpile Management Plan (IASMP). The plan provided a methodology 
for restructuring the current wholesale ammunition storage base, and addressed changes in stockpile management 
methodologies for distribution, storage, inventory, surveillance, maintenance and demilitarization of ammunition 
within U.S. Army Materiel Command. 

Emphasis was placed on improvements which could be made to ammunition supply depot operations, with 
minimal increase in near-term investment, in order to yield long-term savings while creating a smaller, safer 
stockpile with fewer installations, less storage, less manpower and enhanced readiness. 

The plan was approved by the Department of Army and will be utilized as the foundation to bring 
ammunition wholesale supply depot operations efficiently and effectively into the twenty-first century. 


Conventional Ammunition Working Capital Fund (CAWCF) 

In Fiscal Year (FY) 1994, House Appropriations Committee (HAC) report language directed the Army to 
report on orderly procedures for closing the Conventional Ammunition Working Capital Fund (CAWCF) or 
propose implementation of improvements. The joint services agreed to support an improved CAWCF and 
submitted a response to Congress in May 1994. Despite this effort, the HAC's report on the FY95 budget 
proposed closing the CAWCF as of 1 October 1994. The Senate Appropriations Committee (SAC) granted a 
one-year extension to allow necessary improvements to the finance and accounting system. The Conference 
Committee agreed to the one-year extension with a report due back to the Congress by 15 March 1995. 


Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support (ARMS) Initiative 

AMC is utilizing 'facility use contracts" in the ARMS program to make it easier for contractor operators at 
the Army Ammunition Plants (AAPs) to operate the plants similar to commercial contractor facilities. Four more 
AAPs signed facility use contracts during fiscal year 1994: Kansas AAP, October 1993; Iowa AAP, 20 
December 1993; Riverbank AAP, 31 May 1994; and, Scranton AAP, 31 July 1994. Also, since the end of fiscal 
year 1994, Radford AAP has signed a facility use contract (on 19 October 1994). These AAPs join Mississippi 
AAP, Indiana AAP, and Longhorn AAP, which already had signed contracts, for a total of seven AAPs with 
signed facility use contracts. 

The Executive Advisory Committee (EAC), which was established to provide advice to the Army Secretary 
concerning changing roles for the Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated (GOCO) Army Ammunition Plants, 
met four times during fiscal year 1994. Meeting dates were 16-18 November 1993, 16-18 February 1994, 26-28 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

April 1994, and 2-4 August 1994. In addition to these advisory meetings, a workshop meeting dealing with 
preparation of ARMS proposals was held 5-7 April 1994. The charter for the ARMS EAC was amended 3 1 May 
1994 to add four additional members. Positions that were added to the EAC were a government representative 
with acquisition policy expertise and public members who represent ARMS facility subcontractors, facility labor 
organizations, and local community economic development. 

M831A1 Target Practice Cartridge 

The M831 Al 120MM Target Practice cartridge for the Ml Al Abrams main gun was granted a full material 
release on 30 September 1994. The M831 Al was originally type classified in 1993. This cartridge replicates 
the performance of its predecessor the M83 1 while maintaining the same or better cost. 

Hydra 70 Rockets 

Hydra 70 Rockets were suspended when significant defects in the propellant production process were causing 
rocket motors to fail catastrophically. The Program and Production division orchestrated an effort to have all 
assets x-rayed to determine status as well as begin process control changes to ensure increased quality in new 
rocket motors. 

Production Base 

The inactivation of Louisiana AAP and Scranton AAP continued, with work forces preparing to size down 
to caretaker facility use status. Congressional interest in flexible production lines and economically viable reuse 
of the facilities remained high throughout the year. 

Ammunition Production Facilities Consolidation 

As part of the streamlining and consolidation of the ammunition production base, AMCAM has placed three 
of its government-owned, contractor-operated AAPs into inactive status during FY94. These were Louisiana 
AAP, Scranton AAP, and Longhorn AAP. In addition, AMCAM disestablished 25 Production Equipment 
Packages (PEPs) and Army Reserve Packages (ARPs) as part of an overall review of requirements. These actions 
allowed AMCAM to better utilize ever decreasing resources and reduce overall maintenance costs of production 
facilities by over $25 million. 

Permission to Use Non-DQD Hazardous/Toxic Materials at Government Owned Facilities 

To reduce overall operating and ownership costs at ammunition production facilities, AMCAM initiated 
action (requiring congressional approval) to permit the operating contractors at government facilities to allow 
non-DOD hazardous materials onto the installation. These materials would be used in third-party munitions 
contracts or for production of commercial goods by tenants at contractor operated government installations. For 
an inactive production facility, this will widen the potential customer base, spread overhead and support costs 
over more tenants, enhance changes of economically viable reuse, reduce the government's share of the 
maintenance cost, create jobs, and contribute to future munitions production capability. These outcomes will be 
consistent with objectives of the Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Initiative (ARMS). However, the 
initiative does not permit long-term storage of hazardous materials or the resulting scrap and waste at government 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

25MM M919 APFSDS-T Cartridge 

The Army type classified the 25MM M919 Armor-Piercing, Fin-Stabilized, Discarding Sabot (APFSDS) 
cartridge. This cartridge represents the second generation of 25MM armor-piercing ammo for the Bradley 
Fighting Vehicle (BFV), and is a quantum leap forward in penetrating power over the older M791 cartridge. 

Depleted Uranium (DU) Requirements 

The Program and Production Division developed the Army's position on future DU requirements for ammo. 
After study, it was determined that all foreseeable future ammunition requirements for DU could be met by using 
existing stocks of uranium powders, recycling scrap, and reusing penetrators in existing munitions. 

PM Fuze Transition to Army Fuze Management Agency 

The Program and Production Division completed staffing resulting in the Army's decision to transition PM 
Fuzes to a new organization, the Army Fuze Management Agency (AFMA). This action properly postures the 
new agency to integrate fuzing in the development of new munitions, rather than its previous role in developing 
fuzes as stand alone items. The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development, and Acquisition 
approved AFMA's charter in August 1 994. 

Transition of Artillery Projectile Development Management from ARDEC to PEO FAS 

The Army transitioned management of the final stages of development of artillery munitions from the 
Armaments Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) to the Program Executive Office, Field 
Artillery Systems (PEO FAS). Previously, ARDEC managed the development of artillery munitions through 
fielding. The centralization of all artillery system development in PEO FAS mandated a change. ARDEC will 
manage the round in the concept exploration phase. Once a round is selected for development, its management 
will transition to PEO FAS. This decision affected two rounds, the M795 High Explosive Extended Range 
projectile and the XXM982 series of cargo-carrying projectiles for use with the Advanced Field Artillery System 
(AFAS). The M795 immediately transitioned to PEO FAS. The XM982 series rounds will transition to PEO 
FAS upon completion of the current development phase (expected by late FY96). 

Land Mine Export Moratorium 

On 10 November 1993, the National Defense Authorization Act of 1994 amended the Land Mine Export 
Moratorium for two additional years until October 1996. The act imposed a three year moratorium on all sales, 
transfers, or exports of anti-personnel land mines. The moratorium applies to all U.S. government and direct 
commercial sales. 

This moratorium supports a 1991 United Nations protocol, the "Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions 
on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have 
Indiscriminate Effects," which prohibits the indiscriminate use of land mines. 

Foreign manufactured mines (produced by approximately 35 nations) are the primary source of the problem, 
because they generally do not incorporate a self-destruct or neutralizing capability and are liberally available 
within export markets. The United States has not been a major exporter of land mines. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCAM 

The Department of Defense, which has been concerned about the issue since the early 1970's, has designed, 
manufactured, and deployed the Family of Scatterable Mines with a self-destruct capability. These and other 
U.S .-deployed land mines have not been responsible for the indiscriminate casualties that a ban on the use of all 
anti-personnel mines would seek to prevent 

The DOD continues to resist a ban on production, possession, and use of all anti-personnel land mines. The 
DOD believes that such a ban would jeopardize the safety of U.S. forces and remove an essential means of 
hindering enemy mobility, protecting U.S. troops in defensive actions, and channeling enemy forces into selected 
engagement areas. 

A U.N. conference is scheduled to meet in 1995 to review the land mine protocol. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 



Organization and Key Personnel 

On 1 October 1993, the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff (DCS) for Research, Development and 
Engineering (AMCRD) Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) authorization was 21 military and 133 
civilian positions. By 30 September 1994, the TDA authorization had decreased to 16 military and 121 civilian 
positions with one vacant Senior Executive Service position. 1 

With the continued downsizing of the headquarters, and the approval of the Voluntary Early Retirement 
Authority (VERA) and the Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay (VSIP) from 3 January 1994 through 31 March 
1994, the DCS lost 12 civilian employees to retirements, had 5 reassigned internally, 5 transferred to other 
organizations within the headquarters, and 8 new employees assigned from within the headquarters. Civilian 
employees were assigned to their new jobs effective 3 April 1994. During this Fiscal Year (FY), the military 
authorization was reduced by five. 

On 28 November 1993, the Concurrent Engineering Division and the Industrial Base Management Division 
were consolidated and renamed the Engineering and Industrial Management Division, comprised of 5 military 
and 40 civilian positions. This consolidated like functions to make more efficient and effective use of personnel, 
created branches to lessen the span of supervisor's control, and freed the division chief to concentrate on true 
division chief functions. The three new branches were: Engineering Management Branch, Concurrent 
Engineering Branch, and Industrial Management and Technology Branch. 

The Special Projects Office was officially abolished in December 1993 because of reductions-in-force (RIF) 
and changes in the type of work which will be performed at this headquarters. The Special Operations Forces 
mission, spaces and personnel were realigned under the Programs and Plans Division. 

On 1 May 1994, the Army Small Business Innovation Research Program Management Office (SBIR) was 
transferred mission and space to the U.S. Army Research Office (ARO) TDA located at Triangle, North Carolina. 
Functional responsibility for SBIR now falls under the Washington - Army Research Office located in the 
headquarters, AMC Building. The SBIR Program Manager did not transfer with the position but accepted 
another position with the Office for International Cooperative Programs within the headquarters. 

On 1 August 1994, the Programs and Plans Division, except for one Colonel (06) position, was consolidated 
with the Army, Counter-Drug Research Development and Acquisition (RDA) Office to make more efficient and 
effective use of personnel. The title of the consolidated office was Army, Counter-Drug RDA and Special 
Programs Division. The Division was comprised of 3 military and 13 civilian authorized positions. The COL 
(06) position was moved under the Office of the DCS for Research, Development and Engineering and the title 
of the position changed to Special Assistant for Acquisition Reform. 

'Unless otherwise noted, information for this section was taken from the DCS for Research, Development, 
and Engineering Historical Submission for FY94. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Separate Reporting Activities reporting directly under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development, and 
Engineering (DCSRDE) during this period were: 

• Special Projects Support Activity/ Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff (ADCS) Special Operations Forces located 
at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. 

• AMC-Field Assistance in Science and Technology (FAST) located at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. 

• Industrial Engineering Activity located at Rock Island, Illinois/ Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention 
Support Office located at headquarters, AMC Building. 

Reporting directly to the DCS for oversight, guidance direction and resource support was: 

• Office of the Special Assistant for Combat Identification at Fort Meade, Maryland. 

The Army Research Office - Washington located in the headquarters AMC building continues to receive 
administrative support by the DCSRDE. During this FY, the office assumed additional responsibilities for the 
Army's Advanced Concepts and Technology II Program in November 1993, and in April 1994 functional 
responsibility for the SBIR/STTR. The office continues to support the AMC-wide Historically Black Colleges 
and Universities (HBCU). 

Personnel Losses in critical positions (FY94): 

• Mr. Westcott, SES, Assistant DCSRDE for Technology & Engineering, retired 21 February 1994. 

• Mr. Theis, Director, Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention Support Activity, Retired 31 March 1994. 

• Mr. Forty, Program Manager for Army, Small Business Innovation Research PM Office, Transferred 1 May 

• COL Thomas, Acting ADCSRDE for Technology & Engineering, Retired 30 June 1 994. 

• COL Lunsford, Chief, Army, Counter-Drug RDA Office, Retired 30 June 1 994. 
Personnel Gains in critical positions (FY94): 

• Mr. Sullivan, Director, Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention Support Activity, 1 April 1994. 

• COL Leja, Special Assistant for Acquisition Reform, 30 June 1994. 

• COL Lustig, Chief, Army, Counter-Drug RDA and Special Programs Division, 15 July 1994. 

• COL Maness, Acting ADCSRDE for Technology & Engineering, 1 5 July 1 994. 

• Mr. Westmoreland has been serving as Acting Chief, Engineering & Industrial Management Division since 
22 February 1994. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

MG Thomas L. Prather, Jr., DCSRDE, was selected as the 1994 winner of the Black Engineer of the Year 
Award for Professional Achievement - Government. MG Prather was honored on 12 February 1994 at the Black 
Engineer Awards Banquet in Baltimore, Maryland. 

This is the third year in a row that this DCS has one of the Ten Outstanding AMC Personnel of the Year. 
Mr. Wayne Studebaker for 1992, Mr. Maxwell Westmoreland for 1993 and Dr. Paul E. Ehle, Chief, Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation (RDTE) Integration Division, for 1994. Dr. Ehle will be presented the award 
by LTG Coburn on Monday, 28 November 1994. 


Maintenance and Repair/Backlog of Maintenance and Repair (BMAR) 

The FY94 RDTE Maintenance and Repair programs were reduced 58 percent. RDTE facilities are already 
in the worst condition of the Army. Maintenance and Repair is the extent of work (excluding BMAR projects) 
that needs to be done during given fiscal year to keep facilities in serviceable condition - buildings, grounds and 

Significant new facility and tenant growth is a result of previous and planned BRAC consolidations into the 
test Range installations and laboratories. None of these RDTE installations are scheduled for closure. 

RDTE Base Operations (BASEOPS) 

In President Clinton's FY94 Budget, AMC RDTE BASEOPS programs' took a severe budget reduction of 
$16M. While a significant part of this reduction was directed initially against U.S. Army Armament Research, 
Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC), both Headquarters, AMC (HQ AMC) and Headquarters, 
Department of the Army (HQDA) realized that such a large decrement against one command was unacceptable. 
A congressional reprogramming was not timely or supportable so HQ AMC developed a plan to spread ARDEC's 
BASEOPS FY94 budget reduction across all AMC RDTE activities. 

Research Development Test and Evaluation Program Execution Review 

During March through June, 1994, the Army Materiel Command and HQDA conducted a RDTE program 
execution review to (1) ensure maximum and proper utilization of currently available funds; (2) identify funds 
excess to program requirements; (3) monitor customer reimbursable order programs; and (4) provide the basis 
for requirements for the Defense Department's Omnibus Reprogramming Request. 

HQDA recognized several of AMC's RDTE below threshold bills as high priority, but was able to fund only 
a small portion of that total due to other, higher priority bills. HQDA withdrew over $20M in RDTE funds from 
AMC to help pay those high priority bills. 

AMC's Omnibus bill for base operations funds was approved by Congress, but was left unfunded because 
there were insufficient bill-payers. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

FY94 RDTE Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) Bill for Financial Supp ort 

In March 1994, AMC received guidance from DA on the RDTE appropriation portion of the FY94 DFAS 
Bill. The total reimbursement due DFAS from RDTE was $21,297,000. AMC RDTE installations budgeted 
and paid $14,400,000, consistent with annualization of the FY93 DFAS bill, plus inflation and overhead. 

To cover the $6.9M unfunded bill, AMC evaluated every possible source of unobligated FY94 RDTE funds. 
AMC had to use sources which impacted existing contracts, however, the emphasis was on selecting only 
programs with FY95 funds available. After identifying approximately $5M of AMC sources, AMC requested 
and received HQDA assistance. To pay the entire DFAS bill, all of the approved AMC sources and the remaining 
balance of funds furnished by HQDA were provided to AMC RDTE activities and sent via Military 
Interdepartmental Purchase Requests (MIPR) to DFAS. 

FY96 RDTE Program Objective Memorandum (POM) to Budget Issues 

In June 1994, AMC forwarded its approved RDTE POM to Budget Issues to the DA staff. AMC scrubbed 
the RDA database and rationale for Senior Army Leadership decisions and submitted a total of eight high priority 
issues, two of which were funded and six were left unfunded. The unfunded issues were submitted to identify 
resource deficiencies related to proper execution or were required for an adequate business-sense approach to 
resolving critical issues. 

In accordance with HQDA guidance, emphasis was placed on determining how best to execute Senior Army 
Leadership decisions in the POM. HQDA reviewed and ultimately approved one of the funded and three of the 
unfunded POM to Budget issues submitted. The results of the exercise culminated in the AMC portion of the 
Army's Amended Budget Estimate Submission to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) in September 


Procurement Appropriation (Less Ammo) 

During FY94, this DCS managed procurement programs (less ammo) of $1.329B. The AMC Commanding 
General supported an urgent requirement to purchase an additional thirteen International Maritime Satellite 
(INMARSAT) "B" terminals for a total cost of $500K. Funds were reprogrammed in March 1994 from other 
CECOM Other Procurement, Army (OPA)-2 lines to cover this requirement. The terminals will provide a 
voice/data communication capability for AMC Logistics Assistance Representatives (LARs) that will ultimately 
support Army humanitarian and disaster relief efforts worldwide. This was the second increment of INMARSAT 
purchases and brings the total to 21. 

As of April 1994, lead for Program Executive Officer (PEO) matrix support policy and procedures for AMC 
was transferred from AMCRD to the DCS for Acquisition (AMCAQ). This action was in line with AMCAQ 
having overall responsibility for acquisition policy for AMC. AMCRD remains a source for historical 
information on past matrix support activity and for RDT&E and Procurement appropriation issues relating to 
matrix support. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

The Procurement Appropriations Division provided resources for the Industrial Preparedness Operations 
(IPO) Program (Program Element 213045) to support the Army's industrial base and acquisition reform projects 
such as implementation of Activity Based Costing (ABC) and Sector Studies. AMCRD- AP/IE worked closely 
with the Industrial Engineering Activity (IEA) to execute FY94 funding of $882.2K related to industrial 
base/ acquisition reform projects. Total IPO Program FY94 funding was $98M ($13.3M End Item 
Support/$84.7M Mobilization/Surge Support). 

The division also provided FY94 funds for the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) 
(Program Element 423012.1 1) amounting to $1,1 18K for the Army's share of Joint Logistics Commanders' 
Project GIDEP which provides an exchange of information between government and industry. The program seeks 
to reduce or eliminate duplicate expenditure of time and money by making maximum use of existing technical 
data essential in the research, design, development, production, and operational life cycle of systems and 

Resources were also provided for the Standardization Program (Program Element 423012.13) to support 
OSD Military Specifications and Standards Process Action Team (PAT) amounting to $205 .8K and provided 
$1 40K to support Defense Priorities and Allocations Systems (DP AS) Program. Total Standardization Program 
FY94 funding was $10.3M. 

Finally, the division provided resources for the DOD Food Program (Program Element 423012.19) which 
supports activities pertaining to the food service systems intended for use by DOD agencies. Total DOD Food 
Program FY94 funding was $1,925K. 


AMC MSC Pre-Army Systems Acquisition Review Council (ASARCVASARC Support 

In FY94, the MSCs, which provide primary matrix support for systems requiring AS ARC reviews, continued 
to support all pre-review activities and represent AMC at the reviews. AMCRD-AD continued to notify the 
MSCs of upcoming Pre-ASARCs and ASARCs. This division also continued to provide the identity of AMC 
attendees to the ASARC Secretary, and maintained the MSC points-of-contact list and ASARC schedules. 

Delegation of MDA for ACAT III and IV Programs Policy Guidance 

On 14 December 1993, the CG AMC signed a policy memorandum which established the policy and 
procedures for delegating and tracking Milestone Decision Authority for AMC managed Acquisition Categories 
III and IV programs. 

• The DCSRDE was assigned the responsibility to designate the MSC to which the MDA was to be assigned. 

• The Special Programs Section of AMCRD-AD will notify the MSC and HQDA of the assignment. 

• The MSC, at each milestone decision point throughout the life cycle of the system, will provide a copy of the 
Acquisition Decision Memorandum, and any re-delegation of MDA (as permitted by DODI 5000.2, Defense 
Acquisition Management Policies and Procedures) through AMCRD-AD to the ASARC Secretary, HQDA 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 


The following significant actions took place during FY94: 


Coordinated and staffed DA Modification Policy (2nd Staffing) with AMC Major Subordinate Commands 
and activities. Consolidated comments were submitted to HQDA, SARD-RP. 

• Executed S ARDA tasking to determine the minimum set of Materiel Change Information System (MCIS) 
data elements that should be moved to the DOD Migration System. 

• Completed SARDA MCIS tasking by forwarding consolidated list of Army transition requirements to 
SARDA for approval. 

• Met with U.S. Army Audit Agency representatives on close out actions regarding multi-location audit of 
modification programs. 

• Promulgated Modification Policy Guidance issued by SARDA. 

Special Operations Forces 

The Special Operations Forces (SOF) function consists of oversight activities supporting the acquisition of 
materiel required by the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). This includes oversight of 
fund distribution and participation in the development of policy defining the Army's responsibilities in conducting 
acquisition programs for USSOCOM. 

During FY94, due to budget reductions, all but one of the AMC-supported SOF RDA programs that had not 
been completed were either terminated or transferred to a PEO for program execution and oversight. The 
program for the Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) Family of Loudspeakers remains under AMC oversight. 
In addition, AMC continued to monitor the obligation and execution of residual pre-FY94 RDT&E and 
Procurement funds for transferred programs. 

The decline of AMC activity in support of SOF programs resulted in the disestablishment of the CECOM 
Command Manager for SOF Office and a personnel reduction at the ATCOM SOF Readiness Office. Since the 
second quarter of FY94, the HQ AMC functions of program oversight and participation in policy development 
have been performed by one engineer and one program analyst in what is now the Army RDA Counter Drug and 
Special Programs Division (AMCRD- AD). 

Quarterly Management Report (QMR) on AMC Managed Systems 

The QMR continues to provide visibility to the HQ AMC Command Group enabling: the review of events 
that impact the execution of acquisition programs; the identification of problems and issues for submission to 
HQDA; and the determination of where assistance from HQ AMC can be provided. During FY94, the QMR 
database system was automated for unattended reception of updates from the MSCs. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Counter Drug Technical Liaison Supp ort 

During FY94, The Army Counter Drug (CD) RDA Office provided support to Drug Law Enforcement 
Agencies through its technical liaison function. The different methods utilized by the CD RDA Office to perform 
technical liaison included hosting quarterly in-process reviews of on-going CD programs; attending technology 
planning sessions with the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, Joint Task Force-Four, Joint Task Force-Six, 
and Project North Star; and initiating the design of a CD Operational Requirements Technology Database 

Operating and Support Cost Reduction (QSCR) Program 

In 1991, the Army established a task force with a mandate to assure a reduction in future Operating and 
Support (O&S) costs. HQDA, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations (DCSOPS) serves as the program 
proponent, and HQ AMC (DCSRDE) provides program support. 

In FY94, the OSCR Training Package was completed and provided, along with a software tool to assist the 
MSC OSCR Point of Contact (POC) in training those personnel who want to submit OSCR initiatives. The 
OSCR section of DA PAM 70-XX (presently at HQDA for printing and distribution) was finalized. Several 
success stories on MSC OSCR initiatives were distributed to encourage continued interest and effort in the 
program. The SBIR program identified several of their contracts as possible O&S cost savers. Also, in FY94, 
HQDA agreed to extend the number of years used to calculate savings for OSCR purposes from six to ten years. 
This change will enable projects which take a longer time in the development and production process to qualify 
as OSCR initiatives. An annual OSCR reporting format was developed and a report will be produced for the first 
time in FY95 to document O&S actual and planned dollar savings for FY94. 

Industry Visits to Army Units Program 

This program provides industry representatives an unique opportunity to interface with soldiers and gain their 
perspective on how Army equipment is used and maintained. The goal is to produce better equipment, now and 
in the future. Forty-seven senior design and maintenance engineers participated in the four-day visits to Army 
tactical units and depots. The benefit of this program was best stated by an industry participant: "It gave us an 
opportunity to touch and feel the actual hardware and conduct lengthy discussions with the soldiers who use it," 
and, "it helped us better anticipate design conditions for future weapon systems." Two battlefield mission areas 
were covered during the 1994 visits — groups visited Fort Campbell and Corpus Christi Army Depot for the 
Aviation mission area, and Fort Knox and Anniston Army Depot for the Armor mission area. 


All-Terrain Lifter. Articulated System (ATLAS) 

The All Terrain Lifter, Articulated System (ATLAS) is a rough terrain forklift. On 1 June 1994, the ATLAS 
project progressed to a Special In-Process Review (IPR). The Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM) 
Commander approved the integrated non-developmental item (NDI) acquisition strategy for ATLAS. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Construction Equipment Investment Meeting 

The office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development, and Acquisition (ASARDA) 
arranged for a Construction Equipment Investment Meeting held at Fort Belvoir, Virginia on 28-29 March 1994. 
The Product Manager for Commercial Construction Equipment and Material Handling Equipment (PM- 
CCE/MHE) chaired the meeting which was attended by representatives of the HQDA DCSOPS (DAMO-FDD), 
the U.S. Army Reserves (DAAR-LO), U.S. Army National Guard Bureau (NGB-ARL-ME) and the U.S. Army 
Engineer School. The assembled group considered the U.S. Army Concepts Analysis Agency (USACAA) 
Construction Equipment study completed in FY93, the current requirements for the Regular Army (RA), the 
Reserves (USAR) and the National Guard (NG), and the most current budget data from HQDA. The group 
agreed that, as first priority, the PM-CCE/MHE should be provided the budget to replace the compaction 
equipment, the cranes and the Heavy Trucks. All members of the group agreed that coordinated buys (by RA, 
USAR and NG) of these items through the PM-CCE/MHE were essential to get an economical quantity and 
common fleets of the same piece of construction equipment (CE). Several CE issues were discussed and 
addressed by the group including having a "Single Point of Contact" (POC) for all CE issues whether 
procurement or readiness in nature. The group agreed that The PM-CCE/MHE was the only logical POC for this 
mission. The group agreed that the assembled group needed to meet twice a year to discuss the coordination of 
CE procurements and recommended that the next meeting be held in October 1994. Following the meeting, 
HQDA and AMCRD-S/SARD-ZCS were able to restructure the Army's CE budget to reflect the agreed upon 
procurement strategy for CE. 

Investigation of the Army's AN/PSS-12 Handheld Metallic Mine Detector 

During FY94, AMCRD-S assisted in several investigations of the AN/PSS-12 Handheld Metallic Mine 
Detector (HMMD). Senator Spector (R-PA) and a losing competitor for the AN/PSS-12 HMMD were critical 
about the capabilities of the Army's new detector. HQ AMC made an exhaustive examination of all available 
information about the AN/PSS-12 from Army field units, civilian contractors involved in the de-mining of 
Kuwait, Canadians involved in the Bosnian War and other reliable sources. Examination of the data proved that 
the Army had done the right thing in procuring the new AN/PSS-12. All parties with real experience with the 
AN/PSS-12 HMMD were very pleased with its performance, its logistical supportability, and its maintainability. 
A final report outlining the details of the investigation was forwarded to Senator Spector and to the losing 

M9 Armored Combat Earthmover (ACE) 

A System Improvement Plan (SIP) for the M9 ACE, calling for thirty-one reliability, performance, and 
Manpower and Personnel Integration (MANPRINT) modifications, is being implemented in four time-phased 
packages, subject to availability of funding and maintenance. Phases 1 and 2 were completed in FY93. In FY94, 
SIP Phases 3 and 4 were combined into one affordable phase which will concentrate on the critical readiness 
fixes: (1) hydraulic troubleshooting, (2) final drive design, (3) steel dozer blade and automatic blade folder, (4) 
actuator mounting rings and hull access plates. This readiness effort will continue through FY01. 

Restructuring of the Army's Non- Assault Bridging Program 

In November 1994, HQDA DCSOPS began a review of the Army's non-assault Bridging Program (ABP) 
which pushed back funds for the Heavy Dry Support Bridge (HDSB) and the Improved Ribbon Bridge 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Transporter (IRBT) from FY95 to FY99. AMCRD-S/SARD-ZCS participated in the review committee which 
reported the Army*s requirements for non-assault bridging to HQDA DCSOPS. The study group reported that 
the Army's requirements could be met by using an Improved Common Bridge Transporter (ICBT) which could 
carry both the Ribbon Bridge and the HDSB and by expediting the HDSB project. Although the budget for the 
non-assault bridging had missed the budget cycle for FY95 (it had been zeroed), HQDA DCSOPS asked 
AMCRD-S/SARD-ZCS to find a method of funding the ABP until FY96 funding would be available. A method 
was devised to fund the ABP for FY95 and HQDA DCSOPS placed funding into the Army's budget for the ABP 

Restructuring of the Army's Physical Security Equipment Program 

The Army's Physical Security Equipment (PSE) Program is a portion of the DOD PSE Program. The 
RDT&E funding is allocated directly by OSD to each Service on a fiscal year basis. During FY94, AMCRD- 
S/SARD-ZCS moved the management of the Army's PSE funding from the Combat Service Support (CSS) 
Battlefield Operating System (BOS) to the Industrial BOS, which is more compatible with PSE items. Also, the 
Procurement funding for PSE was changed from the Other Procurement Army, Activity 2, (OPA-2) 
(Communications & Electronics Equipment) to OPA-3 (Other Support Equipment) because HQ AMC is the 
appropriations manager for OPA-3, not for OPA-2. HQ AMC is now responsible for both the Army's PSE 
program and funding. 

During FY94, as a final PSE funding proposal, OSD considered moving the budgeting for the individual 
Services to the OSD level. However, all the Services objected on the grounds that the Services know their PSE 
requirements better than OSD. OSD agreed to honor their desires and left the PSE procurement funds with the 
individual Services. 

The Army continues to field several PSE systems per year at the $10 million procurement rate and work on 
several RDT&E projects at the same time. 

Su pport to the U.S. Army Engineer School 

FY94 found the division assisting the U.S. Army Engineer School (USAES) modernize. Significant projects 
included: System Improvement Plan for the M9 Armored Combat Earthmovers (ACE); acquisition strategies 
for the Deployable Universal Combat Earthmover (DEUCE) (a self-deployable bulldozer) for Engineers organic 
to light infantry forces; using updated purchase descriptions and specifications instead of requirements documents 
to procure several construction items; a construction equipment investment meeting with DA DCSOPS, U.S. 
Army Reserves and U.S. Army National Guard to restructure the Army's Construction Equipment program; and 
restructuring of the Army's non-assault Bridging Program. Furthermore, Support Systems Division was 
reaffirmed as the AMC "Single Point of Contact" for the USAES for its materiel requirements. 

Advanced Aviation Forward Area Refueling System 

The Advanced Aviation Forward Area Refueling System (AAFARS) is a lightweight, multi-fuel, four point 
helicopter refueling system used when refueling sites are inaccessible to ground transportation or the situation 
requires rapid emplacement and/or lateral movement of forward refueling sites. This system will be part of the 
forward arming and refueling point for helicopters. It will provide a minimum of 55 gallons per minute (gpm) 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

to each of four refueling points simultaneously. Minimizing ground time allows the aircraft more mission time 
and reduces the vulnerability to ground fire. 

A fixed price contract for the production of 5 test prototypes and 25 production systems was awarded to 
LearAstronics Corporation in July 1993. Two design reviews were conducted. The system layout was completed 
with all major components identified, and fabrication of first article test units has begun. 

The program is on schedule with first article tests starting in February 1995. User evaluation will be 
conducted after this test. A decision will be made in support of follow-on production of the remaining 25 units 
based on the test results and user evaluation. 

Army Watercraft Master Plan 

A coordinated two year effort by the entire Army watercraft community culminated in the approval of the 
Army Watercraft Master Plan (A WMP) in May 1994. The AWMP is a comprehensive document that identifies 
the force structure and watercraft needed to execute the new focus of power projection in support of contingency 
operations. Although this plan recommends a 37 percent reduction of Army watercraft assets, from 508 to 339, 
between 1994 and 2008, the reduced fleet size will support the Army's future force projection needs (specified 
in the Army Strategic Mobility Plan), CINC-driven operational requirements, and HQDA DCSOPS approved 
Tables of Organization and Equipment (TOEs) and Tables of Distribution and Allowance (TDAs). 
Modernization of the Army watercraft fleet includes elimination of outdated barges and elevated piers, upgrading 
of the Lighter Amphibious Resupply Cargo (LARC-60) which is the Army's only amphibious lighter, and 
introduction of modular causeway systems, longer reach barge cranes, pusher tugs, and coastal harbor and inland 
waterway boats. 

Army Water Supply Program 

The Water Supply Program is a DOD-directed program under the Project Manager for Petroleum and Water 
Logistics (PM-PWL). PM-PWL is responsible for the acquisition and standardization of water supply equipment 
for all services. The Army serves as the DOD Executive Agent for Land Based Water Resources. The Tank 
Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center's (TARDEC) Fuel and Water Supply Division 
conducts the research and development for water supply. 

The Water Supply Program is comprised of equipment to analyze, purify, store and distribute water on the 
battlefield. The Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Units (ROWPUs) are used to purify all water sources and 
include the 600 Gallon Per Hour (GPH), the 3000 GPH, the 150,000 Gallon Per Day and the barge mounted 

During FY94, efforts were focused on improving the capability to operate in all environments and with all 
water sources. Specific programs include the Water Purification Components, Extreme Environment Water 
Supply, Enhanced Operations in an NBC Environment, ROWPU Pre-Planned Product Improvement (P3I), and 
Lightweight Water Purifier. 

Under the Water Purification Components Program, market investigations were initiated for new pre- 
treatment technologies, Reverse Osmosis (RO) elements, and pumps that can be used for the next generation 
ROWPU. Studies were also completed on new biocides and cleaners to extend the life of RO elements. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Efforts on the Extreme Environment Water Supply Program focused on improving the capability of water 
equipment to operate in the cold. The technical data package and implementation procedures for the 600 GPH 
ROWPU cold weather kit were completed and assistance was provided to units in Korea on cold weather 
operations. Development of cold weather protection for storage and distribution equipment was initiated. 

In support of the Enhanced Operations in an NBC Environment Program, NBC contamination avoidance 
covers for the 600 GPH ROWPU were evaluated. Also, the design of modular collective protective equipment 
for the 3000 GPH ROWPU was completed as well as a Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis. 

The ROWPU P3I program focused on improvements for the current systems. Standardization of operating 
chemicals for all ROWPUs was completed as well as qualification of additional sources of RO elements for the 
3000 GPH ROWPU. Evaluation of ocean intake systems for both the 600 GPH and the 3000 GPH ROWPUs 
was completed, thus allowing operation of the units on seawater sources where the tide is too rough to deploy the 
current intake system or the tide has receded beyond the distance of the raw water pump and hoses. 

The Lightweight Water Purifier Program will provide the Special Operations Forces and Medical Assistance 
Teams with the capability to purify water during tactical movements, independent operations, or when cut off 
from normal supply chains. A market investigation was completed which identified six companies which produce 
commercial systems that have the capability to meet the Army's requirements. Technical Feasibility testing of 
the candidate Lightweight Water Purifiers was initiated and is scheduled to be completed in FY95. 

Causeway Systems Programs 

The Causeway Systems include the Modular Causeway Ferry (MCF), the Roll on/Roll off Discharge Facility, 
and the Floating Causeway Pier. The components provide a means to move cargo across unimproved beaches 
in areas of the world where adequate fixed port facilities are unavailable. 

On 23 December 1993, the Army awarded a three year contract (DAAKO 1-93-D-0007) for production of 
the MCF to Lake Shore, Inc. of Iron Mountain, Michigan. Total contract value to date is $19.2 million. Two 
protests were filed against the award. Both have been resolved in the Army's favor. Lake Shore resumed work 
on 1 3 January 1 994. 

Lightweight Arctic Forward Area Refueling Equipment 

The Lightweight Arctic Forward Area Refueling Equipment (LAFARE) is a two point tactical refueling 
system specifically designed for operation in extreme cold environments. It consists of a gas turbine engine 
driven pump unit, two filter separators, two insulated batteries, and three 500-gallon arctic fuel drums. In 
operation, the system will simultaneously refuel two pieces of equipment at a minimum flow rate of 50 gallons 
per minute (GPM) and a maximum of 90 GPM flow rate at any one nozzle. The system incorporates a modular 
design providing a two-man portable capability during emplacement and removal. 

A cost plus contract was awarded to LearAstronic Corporation in September 1990 for engineering 
development of the LAFARE. A prototype system just went through qualification testing under which it was 
subjected to full operation at temperatures below -60oF. Final system design is near completion with 
developmental testing scheduled to start in January 1995. Two additional prototypes will be fabricated in the 
second quarter of FY95 and tested in the winter of 1996, thereby completing the developmental test. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Modular Base Petroleum Lab 

The Modular Base Petroleum Lab (MBPL) will replace the existing fixed facility base laboratory. The 
MBPL consists of two semi-trailer vans capable of quick deployment to a theater of operations. It will perform 
quality analysis tests on petroleum, oils and lubricants (POL). 

A production contract for procurement of two units is scheduled for FY95. A MBPL specification and the 
components parts list (CPL) is being revised to include state-of-the-art test equipment to minimize testing time 
and to satisfy the latest POL specification test requirements. 

Petroleum Quality Analysis System 

The Petroleum Quality Analysis System (PQAS) will improve upon current analysis laboratories by 
enhancing battlefield mobility and reducing manpower requirements. The PQAS will determine fuel quality using 
the latest technology based on compositional analysis techniques. The analytical instruments will be linked to 
computer control, data storage and analysis subsystems. The instrumentation package will be integrated into a 
standard lightweight multipurpose shelter and mounted onto a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle 

A successful Milestone I in-process review was held in September 1994 and is awaiting Milestone Decision 
Authority approval. A feasibility study was conducted identifying essential and highly desired fuel quality tests 
which will become the focus of the demonstration/validation phase. A specification and contract package has 
been prepared with scheduled contract award in March 1995. 

Standard Army Refueling System 

The Standard Army Refueling System (SARS) consists of the fuel system design, and a standard refueling 
nozzle and equipment receptacle that will refuel Army equipment in a maximum of two minutes with flow rates 
up to 300 gallons per minute (GPM). The system design is based on ground support, refueling, equipment 
delivery capabilities, and the fuel system flow characteristics. Together, the nozzle and receptacle operate to 
allow fuel transfer through a single port at the acceptance rate of the equipment without external fuel 
contamination, spillage, vapor plume and undue safety hazards. AMC Regulation 70-17 requires the inclusion 
of the SARS concept on all new developments and retrofits where possible. 

A cost plus contract for the design of the SARS system was awarded to Adel Wiggins Group of Los Angeles, 
CA, in September 1991. The system was successfully designed with fabrication of qualification prototypes 
completed in December 1993. Qualification testing has now begun and circulation and coordination of the SARS 
Design Handbook with Government offices and industry have been completed. 

Implementation efforts were initiated through the pursuit of the following on-going activities: design of a 
single tank application for vehicles with only one fuel cell, construction of a bench-top Bradley fuel system 
demonstrator, and incorporation of the SARS concept into the advanced component test bed of the Combined 
Arms Tactical Trainer-B (CATT-B) demonstrator. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Palletized Loading System 

The Palletized Loading System (PLS) is currently the primary component of the Maneuver Oriented 
Ammunition Distribution System (MO ADS). The PLS consists of a 16.5 ton payload prime mover (10x10) with 
an integral load-handling system providing self-loading and unloading capability, a 16.5 ton payload trailer, and 
demountable cargo beds (flatracks). 

The PLS is a Non-Developmental Item (NDI) program which is being executed through a five-year multi-year 
production contract awarded to Oshkosh Truck Corporation (OTC) in September 1990. The program entered 
low rate production in 1991 and was approved to enter full production in April 1993. FY94 is the fifth and final 
year of the multi-year contract. The final year was awarded on 28 February 1994 for 932 trucks, 373 trailers and 
3917 flatracks. Subsequent options were awarded for a hundred additional trailers and 3917 flatracks. In 
addition, the Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) for the Enhanced (Intermodal) PLS flatrack was awarded on 
22 September 1994 for 5000 flatracks. Production will begin in March 1996. The PM is also currently 
developing tanker flatracks to transport water and fuel per Congressional direction and will soon begin the 
development of engineering application flatracks. The PLS First Unit Equipped (FUE) occurred in February 
1994 with units from the 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood, Texas. PLS fielding will continue through FY97. 

Reorganization of PM Soldier 

On 29 September 1994, Project Manager, Soldier was assigned to Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel 
Command. The mission of PM Soldier is to modernize the soldier as a total system. All elements of that system 
must work together to achieve a balance among the soldier's warfighting capabilities (lethality, mobility, 
communications and control, survivability and sustainability). PM Soldier provides centralized project 
management of the Soldier System Program within AMC. This applies to the development and acquisition of 
items the individual soldier wears, consumes or carries in the tactical environment. It also includes non-tactical 
clothing and individual equipment, and dress clothing. PM Soldier is responsible for the coordination of concept 
formulation and programmatics with PEOs/PMs, MACOMs, and other services. PM soldier serves as the AMC 
Executive Agent for the Soldier Enhancement Program (SEP). 

PM Soldier was also established as a Separate Reporting Activity (SRA) under the Commander, Army 
Materiel Command, effective 1 October 1994. Colonel William T. Meadows was assigned as the Project 
Manager in June 1993. PM Soldier reorganized into five teams and a Logistics Management Office in September 
1994. The teams consist of Clothing and Individual Equipment, Land Warrior, Crew Warrior, Soldier 
Enhancement Program and Business Management. 

Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) 

The FMTV is a family of diesel powered trucks in the 2Vi ton (4x4) and 5 ton (6x6) payload classes. These 
trucks will modernize and improve the existing medium tactical wheeled vehicle fleet. FMTV requirements are 
derived directly from those of existing 2Vi and 5 ton fleets. This NDI procurement uses state of the art 
automotive technology, including a diesel engine, automatic transmission, and Central Tire Inflation System 
(CTIS). The FMTV consists of multiple body styles: cargo, wrecker, dump, tractor, airdrop, etc. Due to funding 
constraints, the expansible van and tanker body variants and trailers were deferred until the next multi-year 
contract. The FMTV also has commonality between Light (4x4 LMTV) and Medium (6x6 MTV) vehicles. It 
will improve unit operational capabilities and reduce Operation and Support (O&S) costs. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

In October 1991, Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc of Houston, Texas was awarded a multi-year contract 
to produce 10,843 vehicles (7738 LMTV and 3105 MTV). The first FMTV trucks will be fielded in late 1995. 
Stewart & Stevenson's production facility is located in Sealy, Texas and is a "state of the art" production facility. 
Initial Operational Testing and Evaluation (IOT&E) at Fort Bragg was stopped in September 1994 as Fort Bragg 
personnel were assigned to duties in Haiti. IOT&E is expected to restart in March 1994. Full rate production 
decision (AS ARC IE) is now slated for August 1995. 

Biological Integrated Detection System 

The Biological Integrated Detection System (BIDS) is a shelter mounted on a dedicated vehicle. It is 
equipped with a biological detection suite employing complementary technologies to detect large area biological 
attacks. This is the first time the U.S. Army has had the ability to detect four biological agents in the field. The 
system entered Research and Development Demonstration/Validation phase (DEMVAL) during FY94. This 
program is three phased, starting with a NDI system, followed by a Pre-Planned Product Improvement (P3I) 
program. It will conclude with full procurement of the objective system, the Joint Point Bio Detection System. 
Milestone I/O was conducted in February 1994. CBDCOM is currently building prototypes and will conduct 
Limited User Testing for the NDI system in November 1994. First Unit Equipped for the NDI system is 
scheduled for September 1995. This program is managed by the Joint Program Office for Biological Defense 

Chemical Protective Mask. M40/M42 

The M40/42 mask series provides respiratory, eye, and face protection against chemical and biological 
agents. During FY94, Mine Safety Appliances (MSA) and ILC Dover continued to produce the masks for the 
U.S. Army. In FY94, the first Pre-Planned Product Improvement (P3I) versions of the masks, M40A1/M42A1, 
were produced. The M40A1 mask consists of the M40 with the quick doff hood/second skin. The M42A1 mask 
consists of the M42 with quick doff hood/second skin and canister interoperability. FY94 production contracts 
were awarded to MSA and ILC in the third quarter of FY94. Fielding is continuing per the DA Master Priority 
List (DAMPL). 

XM56 Smoke Generator System 

The XM56 is a large area smoke generator system providing visual, infrared and millimeter wavelength 
obscuration. The system is capable of producing visual obscuration for sixty minutes and millimeter wave 
screening for thirty minutes. The system is mounted on the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle 
(HMMWV). The system successfully completed Initial Operational Test and Evaluation in June 1994 and was 
Type Classified for full production in September 1994. A production contract is scheduled for award in January 
1995. The system will be fielded to Force Package One units throughout the force. 

M93 Nuclear. Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance System 

The M93 FOX Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance System (NBCRS) is a dedicated system 
of NBC detection, warning, and sampling equipment. The system is integrated into a high speed, high mobility 
armored carrier capable of performing NBC reconnaissance throughout the battlefield. The M93 is authorized 
acquisition as a Non-Developmental Item (NDI) interim system due to the need to meet urgent requirements. The 
Army completed procurement of the NBCRS in October 1993 and fielded all systems by January 1994. A 
Systems Improvement Program (SIP) is in Engineering Manufacturing Development. The SIP will upgrade the 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

NBCRS (M93A1 ) to meet all system requirements. The SIP will include the addition of stand off chemical 
detection and a central processing unit, transition to organic maintenance, and reduction of the crew size from 
four to three. The NBCRS SIP configuration successfully underwent Initial Operational Test and Evaluation 
(IOTE) in May 1994. Type Classification for full production of the SIP system is scheduled for December 1994. 

Close Combat Tactical Trainer 

Close Combat Tactical Trainer (CCTT) will be a networked system of manned simulators (Tank, Bradley, 
FIST-V, HMMWV, Ml 1 3 A3) supported by emulators and semi-automated forces. The CCTT simulates combat 
support, combat service support, and both friendly and opposing forces. It will replace the Simulator Networking 
(SIMNET) training devices and will train crew through battalion level combat elements of close combat units of 
both the Reserve Component (RC) and Active Component (AC) in their collective tasks. Under the CCTT 
contract is an option called Quickstart which provides for the early production and fielding of commander 
popped-hatch simulators into fixed facility SIMNET sites. 

In FY94, the U.S. Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Command (STRICOM) continued the 
contract with Loral Federal Systems (formerly IBM Federal Systems Division) for research and development of 
the CCTT. In addition, the option to start the Quickstart portion of the program was awarded one year early. 
That generated an $18 million economy of scale cost avoidance to the program baseline. 

In FY94, the U.S. Army Audit Agency (AAA) published its findings on a year long audit of CCTT. AAA 
recommended that the Army make a decision about what it will do with the SIMNET training devices after the 
CCTT replaces them. TRADOC and STRICOM agreed with the AAA recommendation. 

Fire Support Combined Arms Tactical Trainer (FSCATT) 

In July 1993, the AMC Principal Deputy for Acquisition (Mr. Griffin) requested STRICOM participation 
in the DOD Acquisition Pilot Program (DAPP). DAPP is a program designed to find shortcuts in the acquisition 
process. Mr. Skurka, Deputy Commander of STRICOM, coordinated with Mr. Griffin and the Acting AMC 
Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition, Mr. Tull. In two days he responded to AMC's request with a commitment 
to work FSCATT under DAPP. HQ AMC immediately accepted and passed the nomination to HQDA. Mr. 
Dausman, acting Army Acquisition Executive, approved FSCATT as the Army's DAPP candidate in a 12 July 
1993 letter. On 30 July 1993, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Mr. Deutch, approved FSCATT 
as a DAPP program. 

In FY94, HQDA and OSD proposed to Congress the designation of the FSCATT program as a DAPP. 
Congress did, subsequently, designate the program as a DAPP. It is the only Army program in the DAPP. The 
FSCATT Request For Proposal was issued and bids were received. The contract is expected to be awarded as 
a fixed price contract in FY95. In spite of the desire to accelerate and streamline the acquisition of this program, 
delays have occurred. This is because of the bugs inherent in a program as new and unique as DAPP. 

Tactical Quiet Generator Program 

The Tactical Quiet Generator (TQG) program is a DOD directed program managed by the Mobile Electric 
Power Project Manager (PM MEP). PM MEP is responsible for the acquisition and standardization of new 
power sources used by the Services. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

The TQG program is comprised of generators in sizes of 3, 5, 10, 15, 30, and 60 Kilowatts (kW). These sets 
provide DOD with improved reliability, reduced noise, less weight, high altitude electromagnetic pulse protection, 
and unproved survivability. They will operate on diesel fuel and will reduce the number of generators required 
by utilizing Distribution Illumination System Electrical (DISE). The TQG program will replace the current fleet 
of overage, gasoline fueled generators and will enhance user's safety and survivability. These mobile generators 
provide high quality electric power to most weapon, communication, medical and combat support systems in the 
Army including new system fieldings. 

The TQG program is being executed under two firm fixed price contracts. The 3 kW will be produced by 
Fermont Corporation and the 5-60 kW sets are being produced by Libby Corporation. 

A Process Action Team (PAT) was formed in May 1994 to address a problem with aging Military Standard 
generator sets. The sets were remaining in the field longer than expected due to reductions in the 5-60 kW TQG 
procurement (OP A) funding. The reductions will force extension of TQG procurement beyond the currently 
planned buy-out date. Since contingency units (those that deploy earliest) are being equipped first, the extension 
should not seriously reduce overall unit readiness. The PM intends to present decision alternatives to the Army 
leadership in October or November 1994. 


Integrated Product and Process Management (IPPM) Working Group 

This Working Group was established as the successor to the previous six Concurrent Engineering 
Workshops. These Workshops represented the formulation phase for the application of Concurrent Engineering 
Concepts in AMC Acquisition processes. The results of the Workshops formed the basis for the IPPM 
Guidebook. The IPPM Working Group represents the ongoing implementation phase for Integrated Acquisition 
processes in Army. The first biannual meeting took place on 6 June 1994 at ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal. Video 
teleconferencing is used, periodically, as the medium for interim discussion of progress and issues with the 
Working Group. The second biannual meeting is scheduled for 1 December at STRICOM. 

IPPM Guidebook 

A draft Army IPPM guidebook was prepared and sent to the Major Subordinate Commands (MSC), Program 
Executive Offices (PEOs), and Program Managers (PMs) for review and comments prior to the 6 June 1994 
Working Group meeting. Comments and recommendations have been incorporated into the guidebook and 
periodic video conferences scheduled to continuously revise and update the guidebook. In addition an OSD 
Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) guidebook is being developed. The draft Army IPPM 
guidebook is being used as a model. 

Concurrent Engineering (CE) Symposium — ARDEC. Picatinny Arsenal 

The second CE Symposium, on 7 June 1994, included a feature presentation by Gil Langford on the Status 
of the Implementation of Concurrent Engineering in the Army Materiel Command. The presentation showed the 
evolution from the traditional sequential engineering processes to performance by integrated multi-disciplined 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

teamwork. This focus includes continuous improvement of the IPPM Guidebook by the Working Group as a 
primary guide for Integrated Product and Process Management. Annual Progress Reports will be made to the 

Restoration of AMC's World War II Memorial Tree 

AMC's recognition of the 50th Anniversary of World War II D-Day included the replacement of the 
Memorial Tree in front of the AMC Headquarters building. This was an initiative by the Office of the DCS for 
Research, Development and Engineering and collaboration by the Historical Office and Public Affairs. 

Commercialization of MIL-STD-499. Systems Engineering 

The Joint Services, including AMC participation, issued MIL-STD-499B during the Spring of 1994. It was 
issued as a draft until OSD decided whether to issue it as a standard or by some other name. Meanwhile, an 
industrial committee has edited the draft to commercial standards referenced as Draft Electronics Industrial 
Association (EIA) 632. This draft is currently being distributed to the Joint Services again for review and 
comment. AMC is coordinating this effort with its Major Subordinate Commands and the Air Force, leader for 
the Joint Services. An interim draft is scheduled for release as EIA 632 by 29 November 1994. 

Joint Services Revise Engineering Support Regulations to DLA 

Efforts to revise Joint Regulation DLAR 3200.1 (AR 715-13) which regulates Joint Services Engineering 
Support Activities (ESA) to the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) had been ongoing since 1989 without success. 
Memos from the OSD Deputy Comptroller of Policy and LTG Pigaty of AMC resulted in OSD/DLA establishing 
the Executive Steering Group (ESG) during the Fall of 1993 to look into ESA problems in their broadest terms. 
MG Prather, Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development and Engineering, of AMC represented the Army 
on the ESG. To carry out their objectives, the ESG chartered two 06/GM-15 level Working Groups (WG). WG1 
developed policy/procedures for handling engineering/technical issues. WG2 developed policy/procedures for 
handling funding related issues. Col Thomas of AMC was a member of WG1 and the AMC staff advised both 
groups. The findings of both WGs were presented to the ESG on 3 1 May 1 994. The ESG accepted the findings 
and recommended them for action and approval. On 1 October 1994, the revised regulations went into effect as: 
DA AR 715-13 and DA PAM 715-13. In December, the ESG met to reconsider the need to keep WG1 & 2. 

Comanche Contract Scrub 

AMCRD allowed three people to participate in the Executive Scrub of the Comanche Helicopter development 
contract on 9 March 1994. As a result,the contract was extensively revised and streamlined to include the use 
of performance specifications in design and management; integrating design and management oversight; 
expanding the use of multi-disciplined teams; providing the contractor greater flexibility to streamline and adapt; 
and increasing application of commercial practices. 

Director General for Quality Assurance (DGQA) 

Mr. Mclaren, DGQA, along with two Australian Defense Force (ADF) military officers visited AMC on 24 
June 1994. They were briefed on several Army acquisition improvement initiatives. These initiatives included 
the following: Integrated Product and Process Management Guidebook, ISO 9000 replacing Mil-STD-9858 for 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Quality Management, results of the DOD Process Action Team on Specification and Standards, and application 
of the Functional Support Templates to reduce functional requirements. The briefing fostered excellent 
discussions and exchange of information. 

Functional Support Template (FST) Guidebook 

The FST Guidebook was updated with pertinent PEO and MSC comments and published as an AMC 
sponsored pamphlet. The Guidebook was designated AMC Pamphlet 70-xx. The responding PEOs and MSCs 
were advised by memorandum on the disposition of their comments. 

Performance Specification Guidebook 

AMC Pamphlet 715-17, Guide for the Preparation and Use of Performance Specifications was printed and 
distributed. Copies were provided to the publication office/stock room of each Program Executive Office, major 
subordinate command, and TRADOC. 

Roadshow III (RSIII) 

Between September 1993-March 1994, AMCRD provided three presenters and facilitators for RSIH phase 
one training. The training was conducted at seven MSCs and the Washington, D.C. area. About 800 incumbents 
of Acquisitions Corps' critical positions and other high level acquisition positions were trained in the Functional 
Support Templates. These Templates provide a unique tool for considering cost effective alternatives to high 
cost traditional acquisition practices. 

Roadshow IV 

AMCRD supported AMCAQ in planning Roadshow IV. Mr. Millett was appointed as the AMCRD point 
of contact for this involvement. He participated in several of their planning sessions. The purpose of this 
roadshow is to provide training on best value contracting and source selection to all the procuring commands and 
PEOs. Procuring with a performance specification is also under consideration for inclusion in the training. 
Training was tentatively scheduled to start in December 1994. 

Joint Logistic Commands (JLC) JPCG-CRM Forum '94 

In February 1993, the Joint Logistics Commanders (JLC) approved changes to the Joint Policy Coordinating 
Group on Computer Resources Management (JPCG-CRM) charter to emphasize commercial processes, standards 
and specifications. The IEEE Subcommittee on Software (SC7) sponsored this workshop at the request of the 
JPCG-CRM to determine the direction of commercial software standards over the near term. FORUM '94 was 
held 1 1-14 September 1994. The primary recommendations were to: focus on streamlining the development time 
of non-government standards; publish the draft MIL-STD-498 as an interim military standard until a commercial 
standard is developed; establish ISO/IEC Standard Area for Systems Engineering; and review the standards 
definition process to ensure that compliance criteria to specifications and standards are clear. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Functional Working Groups (FWGs) 

Various projects were initiated to determine the direction to be taken in the future. The primary focus of all 
the FWGs is to adopt and incorporate commercial practices into government processes. For example, the 
Education and Training FWG sponsored a session at the Software Technology Conference to discuss commercial 
practices and determine a course of action. The software Life Cycle Process FWG has done extensive traveling 
to nongovernment standards bodies to influence the course of commercial standards. The other FWGs are also 
working on projects that will impact government software acquisitions in the future. 

MIL-STD-498. Software Design and Documentation 

On 30 June 1994, the MIL-STD-498 project was completed. Due to Acquisition Reform initiatives, MIL- 
STD-498 will not be published as a military standard. The Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE) 
Subcommittee on software (SC7) and the Electronics Industry Association (EIA) are jointly converting MIL- 
STD-498 to a commercial standard. 

NATO Portable Common Interface Set (PCIS) 

This effort successfully developed enhancements to the Portable Common Tool Environment (PCTE) 
developed as a commercial standard by the European Computer Manufacturers Association (ECMA), under 
Working Group TC-33. The contribution of the Special Working Group on Ada Programming Support 
Environments, which sponsored the effort of the ten participating NATO countries, was to add fine-grained data 
and object oriented features to the existing standard, PCTE. The work completed in the summer of 1994. 

NATO Special Working Group on ADA Programming Support Environments 

This was a Ten Nation cooperative effort with the NATO Communications and Systems Agency (NACIS A) 
to develop two distinct software engineering environments based on Ada. It also had a requirement to develop 
a standard Interface Specification, i.e., the NATO Standard Interface Specification (NSIS); this was accomplished 
with the Portable Common Interface Set (PCIS). The two distinct architectures for the environments were the 
SUN and VAX hardware platforms. The project completed officially in December 1993, with an assessment of 
the Portable Common Interface Set completed in the summer of 1994. 

Concurrent Engineering Computer Aided Design (CE CAD) 

Sponsoring scientific and engineering professional societies of the Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 
have accepted the gratis task to identify design rules and practices for through-hole technology for electronic 
circuitry. Also, the societies are creating the knowledge base necessary to develop an interactive, integrated 
expert computer-aided design system. Design rules and practices for the development of knowledge bases for 
other technologies are planned for the future. Assistance is being provided by a Tri-Service process action team 
and participating software CAD developers. Completion of the through-hole knowledge base is planned for end 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP) 

Information on parts safety alerts, alerts, problem advisories, discontinued parts, failure analysis reports, 
calibration procedures, etc., are exchanged through GIDEP. The GIDEP database has been converted from a 
hardcopy system to an electronic database. GIDEP information can now be electronically accessed/exchanged 
throughout the U.S. Government, Canada and participating industry users. 


Value Engineering (VE) 

The Value Engineering (VE) Program within wmtAm CurrentFY94iQ-3QAMCVE Performance 

. m ,„ . , , , ; , . • FY94 Savings Goal YTD $190,801,000 

AMC continued to be the most productive program in savings Achieved ytd $ 198,844,000 

the U.S. Army. Credit for this Outstanding Percent (%) Goal Achieved YTD 103% 

/. .. i*LTn-r» Approved Value Engineering Proposals (VEP) YTD 86 

performance must be given to the VE Program settled veps ytd ..175 

Managers (VEPMs) at the various MSCs and the Approved VE Change Proposals (VECP) YTD 75 

Industrial Engineering Activity (IEA). VENUS Settled vecps ytd 70 

teleconferences have been convened the second Wednesday after the close of each quarter. Quarterly performance 
was reported by VEPMs at each MSC and significant management methods were exchanged. Additional periodic 
teleconferences were convened to coordinate VE actions and exchange information. Staff Assistance Visits, 
performed by IEA, promoted visibility of VE Programs and VE accomplishments within the individual MSCs, 
and assured the proficiency of VEPM performance and the accuracy and conformity of reported VE results. The 
AMC traveling VE exhibits, the "FY93 AMC VE Accomplishments Brochure" and 150 distributed copies of the 
AMC video tape, "The Value in Value Engineering," promoted outside recognition of AMC VE 
accomplishments. At the 24 June 1994, DOD Awards Ceremony, AMC personnel and organizations received 
Honorary VE Awards in four out of six standard categories. The VE Program Management Award was won by 
an Army Program Manager (PM) supported by the U.S.Army Missile Command (MICOM), and the VE 
Contractor Award was won by a contractor to another Army PM supported by MICOM. 

Atlanta Conference 1994 

The Division planned and conducted the 20th Atlanta Conference, AMC's premier government and industry 
executive level acquisition conference. "Designing Strategies for the 21st Century," was the conference theme. 
Lieutenant General (Ret) Lawrence F. Skibbie, President, American Defense Preparedness Association, opened 
the conference. General Leon E. Salomon, Commanding General, AMC, presented his perspective, stating 
success in the current environment of change can be achieved through innovative ideas and open minds. He 
introduced the major subordinate command commanders and summarized their mission and successes. His 
conclusion encouraged an open exchange of information and concerns. 

The conference was co-chaired by Dr. Kenneth J. Oscar, Principal Deputy for Acquisition, AMC, and Mr. 
Kenneth J. Jenson, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (COO), Alliant Techsystems, Inc. Mr. 
Jenson provided the industry perspective to meeting the challenge and addressed industry need for: ( 1 ) money, 
(2) continuing better management of change and (3) attracting, retaining and motivating talent. His intent and 
focus were on deterring conflicts through military preparedness and thereby ensure a favorable outcome should 
a conflict occur. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

The agenda included two discussion panels: Army acquisition and downsizing. The Army Acquisition Panel 

• The Army TOA. 

• Modernization vision. 

• Future 5 systems. 

• U.S. Army Missile Command's streamlining efforts. 

• Government's efforts on best value and past performance. 

• Industry's reaction to best value. 

The Managing Downsizing Panel addressed: 

• Industry's perspective (common and differing problems) on downsizing. 

• Advantages of systems independent research and development and the role of commercial products in 

• Ground rules for establishing core work for depot maintenance. 

• Direction of tri-service development of performance specifications and horizontal technology integration. 

• Industrial Operations Command's perspective on downsizing drivers and the impact to Base Realignment 
and Closure. 

Separate presentations were made on the following: 

• Defense Conversion efforts and successes. 

• The role of AMC's Corporate Laboratory. 

• The Army Budget. 

• Results of the Activity Based Costing Study. 

• A report from industry on their perspective of Army's success in acquisition reform initiatives. 

• Defense Logistics Command's mission and acquisition reform efforts. 

The featured speaker was the Honorable Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of the Army. He spoke on the current 
status of the Army, identified changes that have occurred, and reported on Army Acquisition. In closing, he asked 
industry to join with the Army in its innovative endeavors. Ideas and support would be provided to Mr. Decker 
and LTG Forster, his "agents" for change. 

The American Defense Preparedness Association presented its "Industry Leadership Award" to Mr. Bernard 
L. Schwartz. Mr. Schwartz is the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Loral Corporation. The award was for 
his significant contributions and innovative practices in guiding industry into the 21st Century. 

Conference proceedings were mailed to the attendees. Twenty actions emanated from the conference. These 
actions are being addressed within AMC and the results will be provided as a report out at the Atlanta XXI 
Conference, 17-19 April 1995. 

TRADOC/Republic of Korea Staff Talks October 1993 

The Republic of Korea delegation requested and was provided a comprehensive briefing on Army Test and 
Evaluation as a part of the Staff Talks. The briefing and the working group which followed focused on, and 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

explained, the functions and locations of Army T&E organizations, how and why we test and evaluate, when 
various kinds of testing is done, etc. Video tapes explaining the operations of the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation 
Command and the Operational Test and Evaluation Command, (along with selected test documents) were 
provided to the Koreans. 

Materiel Release Process 

During FY93, Commanding General (CG) AMC approved giving signature authority (powering down) 
materiel release of all U.S. AMC supported systems, except AC AT I and II conditional releases. This initiative 
will improve the streamlining materiel release process. 

Automated Document Conversion System (ADCS) 

On 26 January 1994, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) hosted a DOD-wide meeting to discuss the 
subject test. $14 million was appropriated by Congress to "acquire and test an automated document conversion 
system for the purpose of converting archival drawings and specification of systems currently in the DOD 
inventory into forms of data that support high-level intelligent usage, such as Initial Graphics Exchange 
Specifications (IGES), Product Data Exchange Specification (PDES), etc." DLA is the overall program manager 
with the Defense Printing Service (DPS) serving as the technical manager. 

The plan is for DPS to contract with a support contractor. The support contractor will then identify equipment 
requirements and DPS will procure the equipment. After the equipment is installed in DPS offices, DPS will 
request the Services to provide documents for conversion. DPS will request the Services to pay for the 
conversion, and determine the success or failure of the test. 

In response to a memorandum signed on 8 February by the Assistant Deputy for CALS, Mr. Sandusky, 
suggesting much closer coordination be accomplished between DLA, Joint Computer-Aided Acquisition and 
Logistic Support (JCALS) and Joint Engineering Data Management Information and Control System 
(JEDMICS), the Defense Information Printing Service (DIPS) met with various personnel at MICOM on 9 March 
1 994. Mr. Henry Younger, PM Engineering Data Management Systems/Deputy PM JEDMICS represented 
AMCRD at the meeting. MICOM was selected to be a test site. Delivery of the equipment for the test at 
Redstone Arsenal was made in early July 1994. Testing is on-going but preliminary results are not promising. 


In November 1993, a memorandum of understanding was signed by the JLSC (Capt(S) Bachman), MICOM 
(Mr. Pepper) and HQ AMC (Mr. Younger). In December 1993, the JLSC announced that the Configuration and 
Logistics Information Program "CLIP" was no longer the "official" DOD standard system for configuration 
management and configuration status accounting. The new nomenclature is the Configuration Management 
Information System (CMIS). CMIS consists of a combination of CLIP, Multi-User Engineering Change Proposal 
Automated Review System, Modification Management Information System and Generic Configuration Status 
Accounting System. Initial "re-testing" of CMIS began in April 1994. The CMIS test plan was approved by the 
Army in May 1994. In early May 1994, CMIS testing was stopped because of the number of systems change 
requests (SCRs) which had been developed. An Army CMIS Initial Operational Capability Test IPR was held 
at MICOM, Huntsville, AL, on 25 May 1994. The purpose of the IPR was to discuss the current status of the 
IOC test and determine future actions required to complete the test. Discussion resulted in the following test 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

approach: 1 ) the contractor will incorporate the SCRs by 6 September 1994, 2) MSC training will be held 12-16 
September 1994; testing 17 September through 7 October 1994, and 3) a joint JLSC/Army IPR will be held to 
determine Army acceptance for deployment. Because of JLSC funding problems, the schedule could not be met. 
The contractor was not authorized to start incorporating the SCRs until mid September 1994. Final testing will 
occur in the second quarter of FY95. 

DA Pam 70-XX Part 9 Section A-Configuration Management 

We incorporated detailed comments from Major Subordinate Commands and HQ AMC elements into the 
current streamlined acquisition policy. These changes included: identification of significant management controls, 
incorporation of these controls into Army documentation and developed and published checklists based on these 
controls. The requirements regarding Technical Data Packages were revised to reflect current policy of buying 
the minimum essential data in the form of performance specifications. Text was revised to focus on the 
Government exercising configuration management only to the degree necessary to assure performance of the item. 

Depot Access to TD/CMS Data 

In October 1993, a meeting was held between Mr. Doug Augustine (DESCOM), Mr. Younger (PM Technical 
Data/Configuration Management System (TD/CMS)) and Mr. Knowles (AMCRD-IEE). They discussed the 
feasibility of providing on-line access for all maintenance depots to all TD/CMS sites. Requirements are: 1) 
compatible with future joint systems, 2) non-intrusive to the TD/CMS systems and 3) standard tailored package 
for use at all maintenance depots. It was determined that all requirements could be met at low risk and possibly 
at reasonable cost. This on-line access was necessary to provide a complete system for the Depots to install 
digitized data repositories. They would also be able to access and down-load required engineering drawings from 
the MSC digital data repositories. The first Depot digital data repository will be operation in October 1994 with 
the remaining five repositories installed by February 1995. 

Joint Logistics Systems Center (JLSC) Business Process Model (BPM) 

The basic "whats" and "hows" of the BPM for Configuration Management (CM) was completed by the Army. 
However, because of a lack of dependency diagrams and identification of detailed interfaces, the Army did not 
concur in placing the BPM under configuration management change control. 

Multi-User Engineering Change Proposal Automated Review System (MEARS) 

MEARS was accepted by the JLSC as the system for processing engineering change proposals (ECPs). It 
was incorporated in the Configuration Management Information System (CMIS). MEARS was exercised during 
the initial re-testing of CMIS and was found to be so deficient that its use was discontinued. A separate test of 
MEARS will have to be conducted during FY95. 

Engineering Data Management Systems (EDMS) Program Management Office (PMO) 

On 21 December 1993, the AMC Chief of Staff authorized the establishment of the EDMS Program Office 
to replace the PM for Digital Storage and Retrieval of Engineering Data System (DSREDS) - Technical 
Data/Configuration Management System (TD/CMS). On 30 December 1993, the Chief of Staff gave final 
approval to the establishment of the EDMS PMO and forwarded the proposed charter to the CG AMC for 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

signature. The Chief of Staff signed a memorandum directing the reallocation of spaces and high grades 
necessary for the establishment of the PMO. Ten new spaces were required and came from: MICOM - 1 ; 
DESCOM - 3; ATCOM - 1, AMCCOM - 2, CECOM - 2; and TACOM - 1. The four new high grade 
authorizations were provided by HQ AMC. On 26 January 1994, the CG AMC signed the EDMS Program 
Manager Charter which named Mr. Henry N. Younger as the EDMS PM. 

EDMICS Migration Test Facility 

Under the Joint Engineering Data Management Information and Control System (JEDMICS) Strategic 
Implementation Plan, the Army is responsible for the EDMICS Migration Test Facility in Huntsville, Alabama. 
The facility was completed and the test system accepted in January 1994. Mr. Henry Younger, Program Manager 
for Engineering Data Management Systems (EDMS) assumed operational control of the test facility. Mr. 
Younger, also, serves as the Deputy PM for JEDMICS. 

Functional Economic Analysis (FEA) of U.S. Army Depots to Receive JEDM 

The Management Engineering Activity (MEA) team completed FEAs at Letterkenny, Anniston, Tobyhanna, 
Corpus Christi and Red River Army Depots. Based on an average return-on-investment of 22 months, the 
decision was made to proceed with providing Technical Data/Configuration Management System (TD/CMS) 
access to the Depots, interfacing the Digital Storage and Retrieval of Engineering Data System (DSREDS) and 
JEDMICS, and deploying "Depot" JEDMICS. 


The functional comparison of JEDMICS, Army Digital Storage and Retrieval of Engineering Data System 
(DSREDS) and Air Force Engineering Data Management Information Control System (EDMICS) was completed 
in September 1994. JEDMICS software development continues to incorporate Army and Air Force requirements. 
There are five critical functional issues remaining to be resolved. An electronic interface has been developed 
between JEDMICS and DSREDS allowing the deploy of "Depot" JEDMICS to the Army. Letterkenny Army 
Depot received the first Depot JEDMICS and will be operation in October 1994. Anniston, Tobyhanna, Corpus 
Christi and Red River Army Depots will receive systems by February 1994. In September 1994, Mr. Klugh, 
DUSD(L), directed that Army and Air Force installation of JEDMICS be completed during FY95. 

JCALS Joint Function Requirement Determination Teams (JFRDTs) 

The Strategic Logistics Agency (SLA) initiated the JCALS JFRDT efforts. SLA requested support for the 
Configuration Management (CM) JFRDT and the Corrective/Enhancement Engineering (CEE) team. It was 
determined that the CM JFRDT would duplicate the Joint Logistics Systems Center's Business Process Model 
for CM and the CM JFRDT effort was stopped. The CEE JFRDT effort was supported and draft products were 
provided for initial review in October 1994. 

Army Specifications and Standards Action Team (ASSAT) 

The DCS participated in the first meeting of ASSAT. ASSAT oversees the Army implementation of the 
OSD PAT on Military Specifications and Standards Report "Blueprint For Change." This report has been 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

approved on 1 1 March 1 994 by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. A memorandum from the Secretary of Defense 
directing its implementation was signed on 29 June 1994. 

Final Update to DA Pam 70-XX for Army Standardization Program (Part 60) 

Comments on DA Pamphlet 70-XX were addressed. The final update was completed and sent to Secretary 
of Army, Research and Development (RD). 

Memorandum on the Use of Commercial Specifications and Standards 

This memorandum emphasized the DOD/Army policy to utilize commercial standards in the design, 
development and acquisition of defense materiel. It also encourages participation in the development of 
commercial standards by ensuring maximum membership of Army personnel on non-govemment standards 
bodies. This memorandum was co-signed by GEN Ross and Mr. George Dausman and was sent to the Army 
Program Executive Officers. Similar memorandums were sent to the MSC Commanders and Army 
standardization community earlier. 

Class I Ozone Depleting Chemicals (ODCs) 

This office, the Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention Support Office (AAPPSO), and OASD are 
developing a unified DOD plan to address ODC issues. On 5 October 1993, all the services agreed to list military 
specifications and standards that require the use of ODCs. An initial list has been developed from a computer 
data base. The Navy plans to validate the list before it is released to the preparing activities for corrective action. 

First Standardization Improvement Council (SIC) Meeting. 20 July 1994 

This council is chaired by the Assistant Secretary of Defense For Economic Security. It will oversee the 
implementation of the "Blueprint For Change" Report. Dr. Oscar is the Army representative on the council. 

Industry-Government Standards Partnership V Conference 

This bi-annual conference, held 17-19 November 1993, focused on equal partner relationships to jointly 
develop and use commercial standards. Recent changes to OMB Circular A-l 19, "Federal Participation in the 
Development and Use of Voluntary Standards," emphasize the role of the federal government in promoting this. 
Three awards were presented and two of them went to Army people. Mr. Gene Grant from the LOGSA 
Packaging, Storage and Containerization Center received the DOD Award. Mr. Jim Gallivan, U.S. Army 
Research Laboratory (ARL) Materials Directorate (Retired), received a special life time achievement award. 

Memorandum Directing Army Implementation of the Report "Blueprint for Change" 

Dr. Perry publicly released the "Blueprint for Change" at a news conference on 29 June 1994. He also signed 
the memorandum directing the services to implement it. We prepared a memorandum directing Army 
commanders, directors, PEOs, and PMs to immediately begin implementing the recommendations within their 
organization. It was jointly signed by CG, AMC, and the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE). 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Plan of Action for Army Acquisition Community Compliance with Executive Order 12856 

This order directs the review of standardization documents and appropriate revisions in the area of pollution 
prevention. This office, as the Army Departmental Standardization Office, is helping AAPPSO develop an Army 
plan to address the Order. This plan is also a cooperative effort with the other services and DLA. 

Process Action Team on Military Specifications and Standards 

The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition Reform) chartered this PAT. This team was a part of 
the overall effort to reform the defense acquisition process. It was directed to look for alternatives to military 
specifications and standards. Mr. D. L. Griffin was selected as the executive director. The initial meeting of the 
joint service PAT was held on 25 August 1993 and its final report was issued in April 1994. In June 1994, Dr. 
Perry, SECDEF, issued a memorandum implementing the report. In July 1994, Mr. Decker, Army Acquisition 
Executive, issued the initial draft of the Army Implementation Plan (AIP). Comments were received and the 
second coordination draft AIP sent to the field in September 1994. A final AIP will be issued in November 1994. 

World Standards Day Reception-Cannon Caucus Room 

The reception was held on 14 October 1993. This year's theme was "Standards; A Strategic Investment." 
This annual event was well attended. It is attracting more attention each year as the importance of standards in 
a global market is becoming better understood. In the DOD display exhibit, the Army featured a poster 
explaining our efforts to use environmentally friendly solder fluxes. In addition, we displayed a fully equipped 
soldier mannequin wearing night vision goggles. Five people were available to answer questions relating to the 
Army exhibits. 

Data Management 

The Army's data management policy was incorporated in the SECDEPs 29 June 1994 directive, 
"Specifications & Standards - A New Way of Doing Business." This policy focuses on reducing the requirements 
for data to that which is absolutely necessary in the acquisition process. By reducing the data requirements, the 
Army realized it can reduce the the contractor's burden and the acquisition cost. 

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) 

The committee reviewed 82 cases during 1993. Types of companies acquired by foreign investors were 
Electronics-Semi-Conductors-Communications, Engineering Services, Computers-Software-Maintenance, and 
Chemicals. The major investors in the U.S. are the United Kingdom, Germany and Japan. 

Acquisition Reform Initiatives Accounting Study 

Maintaining a strong industrial base is a vital aspect of U. S. defense policy. But now is a time of reduced 
budgets and declining defense procurement dollars. Defense Contractors are being encouraged to develop 
commercial production in their facilities to help maintain the Defense Industrial Base. Contractors are faced with 
several impediments in attaining dual-use status. Rules and regulations which every contractor must follow are 
complex and costly to comply with. For a defense-only contractor, the costs of compliance are totally 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

reimbursable by the government. They are viewed, in practice, as the "price of doing business." Commercial 
customers will not pay for such costs. 

A method of identifying and quantifying all costs, so that defense work can be appropriately charged, was 
needed. Activity Based Costing (ABC) is an analysis tool which permits accountants (all users) to identify, 
quantify, and understand cost drivers. This technique was introduced by Mr. Alfred King. Mr. King is a known 
financial expert, with creditability in industry, academia, the National Academy of Science, and the Federal 
Accounting Standards Board. Mr. King's firm, Valuation Research, made a report on the ABC technique to the 
Principal Deputy for Acquisition in April 1993. They were then contracted to conduct a 'Proof of Principle" test 
to see if ABC would work in practice. 

To accomplish this objective, six mini-ABC studies were conducted at AMC contractor facilities. These 
facilities include Textron Lycoming, Radford, Scranton, Watervliet, United Defense, and SACO Defense. A 
follow-on study was subcontracted to Peat Warwick to study the Raytheon Missile Systems Plant. This was to 
allow the Defense Contracting Audit Agency to observe the ABC process for evaluation. 

The 'Proof of Principle" test was successful. It demonstrated that ABC can be used to reduce or eliminate 
accounting impediments to dual-use of defense facilities. The study recommended adopting ABC to accomplish 
four objectives. First, identify and determine all costs incurred in complying with DOD unique requirements. 
Second, quantify the costs incurred if a facility is required to run at less than full capacity. Third, identify non- 
value-added costs. Finally, determine more accurate unit production costs. 

ABC was approved for implementation in the April 1994 Report of the PAT on Military Specifications and 
Standards by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Technology. 

Department of the Army (DA) Test and Evaluation (T&E) Managers April - October 1994 

The DA Test and Evaluation Committee (TEMAC) met on 26-28 March 1 994. The Army T&E Community 
was represented as well as the Aviation Program Executive Office. One of the most informative presentations 
was given on the Status of the Test and Evaluation Executive Agent Organization. This organization represents 
a fundamental change in the way T&E infrastructure is managed. The Executive Agent is composed of a Board 
of Directors and a Board of Operating Directors. These Boards will now centrally approve all Army T&E facility 
purchases above a certain dollar threshold. Coordination will be done with other Services to ensure there is no 
unnecessary duplication. The Boards will also review all current assets for need. The express purpose of the 
boards is to reduce or consolidate T&E Assets. 


Non-Developmental Item (NDI) Program 

The main focus of this program is to identify and evaluate existing materiel that meets established Army 
requirements. This materiel could be commercial, modified commercial or other Service, country, or Government 
agency. The NDI program facilitates the fielding of Army materiel, usually non-major systems, to the users. 

In FY94, the NDI Program had a budget of $5,677 million under the Research, Development, Test and 
Evaluation (RDTE) account. In general, two types of NDI tasks were funded, market investigation and 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

operational testing. Market investigations tasks analyzed state-of-the-art commercial items to determine how 
closely they satisfied the Army's requirements. Operational testing tasks modified the state-of-the-art commercial 
items and tested them, ensuring they satisfied the Army's requirements. The Tank-Automotive Command 
(TACOM), Aviation Troop Support Command (ATCOM) and Communications-Electronics Command 
(CECOM) managed these tasks for the Army. 

Accomplishments included the facilitation of fielding materiel to the users. Just to name a few: 

• Head-Up Display ANVIS/HUD: improves operational capabilities and safety of night flight operations. 

• High Density Microcircuit Assembly: proves that commercial microprocessors are militarily adaptable. 

• Medium Integrated Propulsion System: improves the performance of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle or a 
vehicle up to 44 tons. 

• Mobile UHF TACSAT With Azimuth Tracking Antenna: maximizes striking potential of ground 
mobilization forces by providing communications while on-the-move during battlefield maneuvers. 

• Automated Integrated Survey Instrument: provides military surveyor with single means to perform functions 
formally carried out with theodolites, tapes, and distant measuring devices. 

• Detecting Set, Metallic-Mine, Portable, AN/PSS-12: provides a commercially procurable metal detector 
which exhibits or exceeds performance of current metallic-mine detectors. 

This program is an integral part of the DOD acquisition streamlining effort. It also contributes significantly 
to the total Army NDI program. 

Technology Implementation and Infrastructure Improvement (TI 3 ) Initiative 

In FY94, the Army assisted other DOD Components in replacing the Industrial Modernization Incentives 
Program (IMIP) with the TI 3 initiative. This continues the Army's emphasis on reducing costs of modernization. 

From FY90 through FY93, the IMIP's average return on the Army's investment was approximately 60 
percent per fiscal year. Further, the ratio of contractor and other services investment to the Army's investment 
was approximately 2: 1 . The IMIP funded modernization projects that supported production of Comanche, Kiowa 
and Apache helicopters; Ml Al tanks; Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS); Javelin anti-tank weapon; 
Sense and Destroy Armor (SAD ARM) submunitions; 50 cal machine guns; and MK 19 grenade launchers. 

At present, declining defense budgets means less money for the industrial base and the potential demise of 
key suppliers. As a result, representatives of DOD and the Aerospace Industry Association (AIA) have 
reconstituted a new modernization initiative called TI 3 . The purpose is to link emerging and well-established 
process technologies with acquisition requirements for weapon systems and components. 

In the Army, the TI 3 Business Plan was developed by a panel of Army representatives from the Major 
Subordinate Commands (MSCs). It is the "vehicle" by which the Army will identify low risk manufacturing 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

process and technology opportunities. These opportunities will support Army acquisition programs and 
modernize the industrial base. The development of the Business Plan entailed: 

• Identification of customers. 

• Review and analysis of higher level Army management documents and industrial base documents. 

• Work with PEOs/PMs and their contractors in the identification of manufacturing problems and their 

• Development of criteria for selection and prioritization of modernization opportunities. 

• Preparation of the business plan and coordination with MSCs, PEOs/PMs and industry. 

• Publication is scheduled for early FY95. 

Current plan calls for continued participation with the DOD Components' effort to establish the TI 3 initiative. 
This effort already interacts with the Defense Manufacturing Council's Task Force on Affordability, the 
Manufacturing Science and Technology Program, the Joint Group on the Industrial Base and the Title III 

Industrial Sector Surveys 

Sector surveys are the Army's primary method to evaluate the capability of the industrial base to support its 
material requirements. The original sector surveys were conducted in 1992. During 1994, a major update of 
twelve industrial sectors was conducted. The sectors included: Satellite Communications, Radio Communications, 
Sensors, Wheeled Vehicles, Small Caliber Weapons, Tactical Missiles, Tracked Vehicles, Large Caliber 
Weapons, Electro-Optics, Chem-Bio Defense, Ammunition, and Helicopters. A kick-off meeting for the surveys 
was held 15 March 1994. Personnel from AMC, MSCs and industry associations attended. The surveys were 
completed in August 1994. A macro-metric chart is used to display the health of the industrial base. It displays 
all twelve sectors and indicates whether the capability of the sector is strong, acceptable or weak. The Industrial 
Engineering Activity, Rock Island, II. is preparing briefings on sector survey results. The briefings will be 
presented to the DCG AMC, CG AMC, Chief of Staff, Army and the Secretary of the Army. 

Joint Flexible Computer Integrated Manufacturing (FCIM) Program 

At the JLC meeting of 1 4- 1 6 February 1 994, the JLC decided to combine the Joint Technical Coordinating 
Group-Computer Aided Acquisition and Logistics (JTCG-CALS) and the Joint Technical Coordinating Group- 
Flexible Computer Integrated Manufacturing (JTCG-FCIM). It was anticipated that this would improve 
communications both within the JLC community and with the offices of the Secretary of Defense. A CALS 
Harmonization team was established to provide a plan and charter to the JLC by June 1994. The plan proposed 
merging JCALS, JFCIM, and JEDMICS under a single Joint Technical Coordinating Group for Integrated 
Product Data Environment (JTCG-IPDE). The mission of the JTCG-IPDE is to advance the implementation of 
an integrated data environment. Also, the JTCG-IPDE is to foster continuous business processes improvements 
for the people who work with weapon systems. To achieve this mission, the JTCG supports the development, 
implementation, and exploitation of an integrated product data environment. The JTCG supports the JLC and 
works in cooperation with OSD in achieving the DOD CALS 2010 Vision. In June 1994, the JLC accepted the 
harmonization plan and in September 1994, the JLC signed the new charter. 

The JTCG-IPDE will be administered as follows: 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

• The Joint Center-FCIM, located in Charleston SC, has become the Joint Center-IPDE. The Joint Center 
coordinates the execution of the Joint Implementation Plan. The Joint Center is staffed by a small cadre of 
full-time personnel provided by the services. 

• Volunteers from the JTCG-JPDE Component will participate on a permanent part-time basis in the following 

•• Business Process Team: Identify and resolve policy, business and cultural barriers. 

• • Technology Coordination Team: Coordinate user-driven technology needs throughout the technology 

community and recommend potential solutions. 

• • Strategic Planning Team: Establish and monitor performance measurements that track progress towards 

achieving the CALS vision and the JTCG-JPDE mission. Recommend changes as appropriate. 

• • Additional teams may be established as necessary to accomplish specific tasks. 

• Establish a JTCG-IPDE working group to monitor and coordinate CALS and FCIM issues tasked by the 
JTCG. This group monitors and coordinates the JTCG agenda and prepares for JTCG approval, periodic 
reports and briefings to the JLC. 

At this point in time, the Army FCIM program is virtually at a standstill because of lack of FY94 funding. 
Letterkenny depot is continuing to implement FCIM in FY94 because of Congressionally provided funds of 
$8.1M. CECOM has been provided about $400K in PBS funds to continue their initiatives. All other FCIM 
initiatives are on hold until FY95 funds have been released. The first FCIM site, Tobyhanna depot, will be 
operational in May 1995. A demonstration of JCALS, JFCIM and JEDMICS in an integrated data environment 
is planned for July 1995. 

Manufacturing Science & Technology Program (MS&T) 

In FY94, oversight of MS&T was transferred to the Director, Defense Research & Engineering (DDR&E). 
It was made an element of the Science and Technology (S&T) Thrust for Affordability. This recognized the 
importance of manufacturing processes in the development phase of new technologies. It can reduce the 
transition from Research and Development (R&D) into production. The DDR&E manufacturing strategies 
include investment in manufacturing process technology and integration of the defense and commercial industrial 

The Joint Directors of Laboratories (JDL) recently chartered the JDL MS&T Panel. The panel was to 
integrate requirements, develop joint program planning and strategies, oversee MS&T programs conducted by 
the Services and DLA, and to coordinate these activities with other agencies. 

The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development, and Acquisition) has overall responsibility 
for the Army MS&T program. The Director of Research and Technology was charged with supervision and 
oversight of the program. The Program Director for MS&T is HQ AMC with the DCS RDE performing this 
function through AMCRD-IEM staff. IEM staff provides funding allocation direction and policy guidance to the 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

MSCs and ARL. Within each MSC, detailed management and execution of the program is accomplished by 
Thrust Area Managers. 

Army MS&T activities are an integral part of the Army's overall Science and Technology (S&T) Program. 
It provides MS&T expertise for Advanced Technology Development (ATD), S&T objectives, Basic Research, 
and other activities. This includes support of the manufacturing technology needs of the Army's acquisition 

The JDL's Technical Categories for Army MS&T are Manufacturing Systems, Electronics Processing and 
Manufacturing, Composites Processing and Manufacturing, Metals Processing and Manufacturing, Army Special 
Interest Areas, and Integrated Industrial Base Pilots. The customers of the Army MS&T program include the 
Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), the Program Executive Officers (PEOs), and Program 
Managers (PMs), the buying commands and organizations which support them, and the industrial base required 
to produce the material. The Army MS&T Program stake-holders include Congress, OSD, Service Acquisition 
Executives, other Services, the JDL, and ultimately the soldiers who are users of this materiel. 

The Army MS&T Business Plan is a follow-on of the 1992 Strategic Plan. It combines the requirements and 
manufacturing needs of Army weapon systems, the manufacturing issues resulting from Advanced Technology 
Development, and MS&T opportunities from the research community. Particular emphasis is placed on 
identifying unique Army products. The Army Business Plan provides guidance for management of the Army 
MS&T Program and forms the basis for coordination with the MS&T plans of the other Services, DLA, JDL 
MS&T Panel, and other agencies. 

Army funding leveraged with the other Services, Fundin 8 ( in Millions) for FY94 


agencies, and private sector investments has been the composites $1690 

key to recent Army SUCCeSS. In FY93 and FY94, Electronics Manufacturing 0.922 

Congressionally Directed efforts have been the E^meT^ 2 JS 

majority of the funding. As a result, the discretionary Manufacturing Systems 0.400 

dollars available to fund Army requirements for Non-Destructive Evaluation 1.418 

J M Electro-Optics 2.425 

MS&T have been below the President's budget, optics Manufacturing 1.400 

Congressionally Directed projects have increased the Missile Seekers 1.525 

total funds for Army MS&T. But, at the same time, Metals stop 

they have severely limited the funds that can be total $43,200 

applied to continuing MS&T projects. This directly impacts Army MS&T's ability of to address manufacturing 
processes that will reduce Army acquisition and sustainment costs. The Congressionally Directed portion of the 
total funding is $27.2M. 


Association of the United States Army (AUS A) Symposiums 

The Chief of Staff, Army relies heavily on AUSA symposia to assist in marketing the Army story. Two 
symposia were produced in FY94 — Orlando and San Jose. AMC served as the executive agent for the February 
symposium in Orlando, Florida and CECOM was the AMC lead. The theme was "Winning the Information 
War." A pavilion was constructed to showcase the Army's technologies and equipment under development to 
win the information war. Several presentations were made centering on the theme: "Warfighting Benefits of 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Winning the Information War," "Assured Seamless Communications," and "Horizontal Integration Across the 
Battlefield." This symposium provided senior Army leaders and industry executives an excellent opportunity to 
address the force of today and the future. 

TRADOC served as the executive agent for the May 1994 AUSA symposium in San Jose, California. The 
theme was "Force XXI Battle Command." GEN Salomon was invited to do a special presentation on 
"Acquisition Streamlining." The AMC LAM Task Force served as the lead in pulling the presentation together. 
LAM also constructed an exhibit on Acquisition Streamlining. 

The Chief of Staff, Army viewed both of these events as very successful. Planning for the FY95 AUSA 
symposia is underway. 

Acquisition Streamlining 

Several initiatives are being examined through pilot programs within the LAM process to assess potential 
acquisition streamlining. These initiatives include: 

• Battle Lab Rapid Acquisition Pilot Programs. Four programs, Super High Frequency (SHF) Triband 
Advanced Range Extension Terminal, Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit, Bradley Stinger Fighting Vehicle- 
Enhanced and Advanced Precision Aerial Delivery System, are being used to demonstrate rapid acquisition 
of materiel emerging from Battle Lab technology. These programs use the existing process in innovative 
ways. They assume and manage increased risk in order to accelerate the acquisitions. Successful 
acquisitions will serve as models for future streamlined efforts. 

• CECOM Business Process Reengineering Pilot Program. CECOM is applying the Business Process 
Reengineering methodology via commercial software to the process of letting task orders. Significant time 
savings are predicted. The methodology will be recommended for other acquisition processes based on 
successful demonstration in the pilot program. 

• Program Management (PM)/ Acquisition Documentation and Source Selection Evaluation Board Suite of 
Software Tools. This suite, which helps prepare, update, and maintain PM and contract documentation, has 
been developed under Government contract. The suite also contains software that assist in the Source 
Selection Evaluation process. The Army Digitization Office (ADO) is helping to test the software tools in 
"real world" ADO acquisitions. Upon completion of the trial, benefits will be assessed and, if appropriate, 
expanded application recommended. 

• Virtual Testing. Working with TECOM to identify sufficiently mature virtual tests that can be applied to 
an existing acquisition program. The intent is to demonstrate Test Integration Working Group 
(TIWG)/Independent Evaluators acceptance of resultant test data, and to document time and cost savings. 

Exercise Atlantic Resolve 

Atlantic Resolve, held in October 1994, is a radical departure from previous REFORGER exercises. Atlantic 
Resolve is no longer a return of forces to Germany to fight a Central Region high-intensity conflict. Instead, it 
is a contingency-based exercise that involves deployment out of the Central Region by a joint multinational force. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

The exercise also focuses on operations other than war (OOTW), joint and combined warfighting, and 
sustainment outside the Central Region. 

This is a Computer Assisted Exercise (CAX) for deployment, sustainment and combat operations. It will 
be the first demonstration of the Synthetic Theater of War - Europe (STOW-E) concept in an exercise 
environment. The deployment phase of the exercise will be conducted in Kaiserslautern and the employment 
phase at Grafenwhoer Training Area. 

The LAM Task Force and U.S. Army Europe have established a joint data collection team. The team will 
investigate issues pertinent to the exercise with the AMC LAM Task Force looking at the following sustainment 

• Prepositioned Strategic Stocks. 

• Total Asset Visibility. 

• Joint Logistics Support Element/Command. 

• Ammo Distribution. 

• Logistics Anchor Desk. 

Participation by AMC includes the Logistics Anchor Desk (LAD), the Logistics Support Element (LSE), 
Ammunition Support, and higher HQ representation. The LAD will be used at the 21st TAACOM Simulation 
Center for the exercise. It will also be used in the STOW experiment and Analysis Facility at Grafenwhoer. At 
Grafenwhoer, the LAD will demonstrate the Log C2 for the Synthetic and digitized Battlefield of the future. 
LOGSA and AMC-Europe will exercise the LSE in support of the Joint Task Force and the land Component 
Command. Several individuals will support the Exercise Control Cell to represent AMC higher HQ elements. 

Exercise Northern Lights 

Exercise Northern Lights, held in June 1994, is a Divisional Command Post Exercise (CPX) aimed at 
addressing Command, Control, Communications and Information Systems (C3IS) concepts and procedures. 
These concepts are for American, British, Canadian and Australian (ABCA) armies to operate effectively together 
in low to mid-intensity operations. The AMC LAM Sustainment sub-issue evaluated during this exercise was 
Support of Deployed Forces — specifically, support to coalition forces. The issue was refined to address 
Sustainment/Combat Service Support available to allied forces in combined operations. 

The following are general observations of the exercise, since the design did not allow for a detailed 

• The Division Rear Command Post performed all combat support functions. 

• Each brigade had its own first line support. Second line support came from a logistics support unit. Third 
line support was provided by a combined Logistics Support Battalion. There was no Division Materiel 
Management Center for specific classes of supply and to allow for division level asset visibility. These 
functions may need to be studied within the ABCA "lead nation" concept when planning for division level 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

• The following demonstrated automated systems were identified as essential within the theater of operations: 
Total Distribution Advanced Technology Demonstration, Logistics Anchor Desk, Total Asset Visibility and 
Optimum Stockage Requirements Analysis Program. 

• The Forward Support Battalion concept worked well. 

Exercise Prairie Warrior 

This training exercise, held in May 1994, is for the Command and Staff College (CGSC) and the Combined 
Arms Support Command (CASCOM). It is the warfight/Battle Lab excursion of the General Headquarters 
exercise (GHQx). The AMC LAM Sustainment sub-issues evaluated involved: Support of Deployed Forces, 
Total Asset Visibility (TAV) and Prepositioned Strategic Stocks (PSS). 

AMC will expand its role in the developing training simulation databases in order to inject some realism, i.e., 
equipment shortages. Linking Prairie Warrior to GHQx will require more effort to ensure success in May 1995. 

Exercise Reception. Staging. Onward Movement, and Integration (RSOI) 

Exercise Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration (RSOI) was held in April 1994. It 
addressed logistics issues associated with units and materiel entering the Korean theater during hostilities. The 
first week of the two-week exercise consisted of a senior leaders RSOI overview seminar. A simulation to 
evaluate previously identified issues took place during the second week. The scenario involved hostilities 
escalating until the Timed-Phased Force Deployment List begins to send in reinforcements and materiel. 

RSOI was considered an overwhelming success. It will be used to evaluate LAM issues in the future with 
the Combat Service Support Training Simulation System (CSSTSS). With CSSTSS and Combat Battlefield 
simulation, RSOI will be the premier exercise to observe and evaluate sustainment issues. 

Exercise Ulchi Focus Lens 

Exercise Ulchi Focus Lens (UFL), held in August 1993, was a joint U.S. Forces Korea/Republic of Korea 
command post exercise. The training audience is the Combined Forces Command and its component staffs. 

The following findings address sub-issues investigated during the exercise: 

• The Prepositioned Strategic Stocks (PSS) concept was introduced during UFL. It was determined that its 
plans, procedures and policy have improved but need further defining. PSS policy is still not well understood 
at the user level. 

• There was much confusion surrounding the status of AR3 stocks at start of exercise. Conflicting information 
was provided on whether assets had been released and the location of ships. No contingency plan existed to 
address non-availability of AR3. 

• Total Asset Visibility. Air shipments are made through FEDEX, which must be contacted to obtain asset 
visibility during movement. There is no method to track visibility of surface shipments after receipt at port. 
The contents of containers are not available either. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

• Korea fully accepts the Logistic Support Element (LSE) as required to fill logistics shortfalls. However, the 
required planning to identify and develop LSE roles cannot be accomplished until the TDA is funded. 
Limited logistics play provided minimum opportunity to exercise the LSE. 

• There was confusion over identifying ammunition as U.S. Army, Republic of Korea Army or Combined 
assets. As a result, ammunition managers were unable to track expenditures, losses and due-ins. They could 
not furnish accurate Readiness Condition (REDCON) status reports. 

FY94 Data Collection 

AMC's LAM Sustainment Issue data collection efforts began in FY93. During FY94, data was collected on 
Prepositioned Strategic Stocks (PSS), Ammunition Distribution, the Logistics Support Element (LSE), Total 
Asset Visibility (TAV)/In-transit Visibility (ITV), Coalition Forces, CSS Satellite Communication Requirements 
and the Logistics Anchor Desk (LAD). The exercises used for data collection were: Prairie Warrior, Northern 
Lights, RSOI, Ulchi Focus Lens, and Atlantic Resolve. 

There were problems with the data collection efforts. AMC acted to resolve those problems by improving 
data collector training and by refining the data collection plans. A dedicated corps of 1 5 data collectors who were 
subject matter experts was established. In addition, AMC became more involved in exercise planning to 
maximize usefulness in examination of LAM sub-issues. The Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity 
(AMSAA) is the lead for AMC in LAM and Force XXI data collection 

Logistics Anchor Desk 

The AMC LAM Task Force initiated the Logistics Anchor Desk (LAD) in February 1994 to investigate 
sustainment for Force XXI. The LAD consolidates data from multiple sources to provide situation awareness 
for the user. This shared view is fed into models and simulations for the development, evaluation and analysis 
of courses of action. 

During Prairie Warrior 94, the LAD used exercise simulations to provide "ground truth" data. Users at the 
tactical, operational and strategic level shared a common view of the logistics battlefield. 

User-centered development kept the LAD focused on the user's problem set. LAD was developed to solve 
the real problems highlighted by General Headquarters (GHQ) and other major exercises. This focus on concrete 
challenges rather than the hypothetical has greatly enhanced both usability and credibility. 

AMC used the LAD in a distributive collaborative planning demonstration for the Secretary of Defense. The 
demonstration showed that LAD is emerging as a significant player in the joint planning community. 

Total Asset Visibility 

Total Asset Visibility (TAV) and In-transit Visibility (ITV) were identified as some of the major distribution 
shortcomings during Operation Desert Storm. There is a need to resolve ITV and TAV problems in order to 
support a force projection Army. The cornerstone for attaining ITV and TAV consists of Automatic 
Identification Technology (ATT), effective integrated automation systems, and assured communications. Satellite 
tracking technologies coupled with AIT can further enhance ITV and TAV. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

The Future-Europe Automatic Identification Technology (Future-EUR AIT) project demonstrated "inside- 
the-box" visibility, source data automation, and satellite tracking capability. They used the retrograde of materiel 
from Europe to show ATT in different operating environments. Phase I used Radio Frequency (RF) tags to track 
ammunition containers from Europe to CONUS, January to April 1993. Meanwhile, Task Force Bronco — a 
force-tracking initiative — traced the 25th ID from Hawaii to the Joint Readiness Training Center. This 
demonstrated the ability to provide visibility of a deploying force and its equipment. Phase U focused on OCEAN 
VENTURE 93, which tagged and tracked containers and vehicles throughout the Joint Logistics-Over-the-Shore 


BRAC 95 Joint Laboratories Cross-Service Group (JLCSG) 

From April 1994 through October 1994 AMCRD initiated a separate BRAC 95 JLCSG office. The office 
was permanently staffed with three people from AMCRD-IT and one person from AMCRD-JE. It collected, 
reviewed, and integrated BRAC 95 Data Call responses in response to OSD Laboratory Consolidated efforts. 
During May 1994, representatives from each AMC Research, Development and Engineering Center (RDEC), 
ARL, the Army Research Organization, STRICOM, and AMS AA met. They conducted an in-depth analysis of 
proposed BRAC 95 JLCSG submissions to insure accuracy and completeness of data. The "murder board" 
approach was also utilized to assure accuracy and completeness with answers submitted in all other separate 
BRAC 95 data calls. No BRAC 95 JLCSG decisions have been formulated or announced by OSD yet, 

AMC Laboratory Construction 

In FY94, AMCRD became more active in the overall process of laboratory construction. Working with the 
AMC Facilities Engineers, AMCRD-IT was an active participant in three major laboratory construction projects, 
ARL-Adelphi, ARL-APG, and TACOM-TARDEC. Each project included several elements. There would be 
an Army Audit Agency (AAA) or Inspector General (IG) report to be reviewed and answered, a funding problem 
would have to be handled through alternate proposals and cuts, and a briefing would have to be given to DA or 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E) for approval. AMCEN has indicated an appreciation 
for the "mission" view AMCRD has brought to the process. 

Former Soviet Union (FSU) Activities 

AMCRD was asked to represent the Army in several areas. These included a DDR&E level FSU panel, and 
a JDL level panel. The DCS will also represent AMC on the DA level committee. All panels/committees will 
discuss and prioritize technologies that the U.S. should pursue with the scientific community within the FSU. 

International RDTE 

AMCRD again headed the Army delegation to the German/US Joint Technology Steering Group. The FY94 
meeting was held in Bonn Germany in February 1994. One of the highlights of this meeting was the AMCRD 
prepared cross walks of the Army Science and Technology Master Plan (ASTMP), the German Technology 
Planning Papers, and the joint Data Exchange Annexes (DEAs). This cross walk allowed the group to 
concentrate future agreements within the common technologies. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

RDTE Space Authorization Panel 

Early in FY94, an Ad Hoc panel was established within HQ AMC to oversee the distribution of RDTE 
authorizations within AMC. The panel included the Principal Deputies for Technology and Acquisition, the DCS 
for RD, AMCSO, AMCRM, and AMCPE. The initial task was the distribution of a 3000+ cut in RDTE 
authorizations over a five year period. Meetings were held approximately every six to eight weeks to discuss and 
decide on adjustments to the MSC's RDTE authorizations. This is the first time AMCRD has taken an active 
role in the management of RDTE spaces within AMC. 

AMC RDTE Board of Directors (BOD) 

The primary purpose of the AMC RDTE BOD is to develop high-level coordination within the RDTE 
community. This ensured program processes, strategies and policies were integrated, streamlined and effective. 
Membership includes Headquarters, Department of the Army, Headquarters, TRADOC; HQ AMC and Directors 
of subordinate elements within AMC. The BOD is chaired by Deputy Commanding General, AMC. During this 
time period two BOD meetings were held. The BOD reviewed key issues on AMSAA's support role, Unexploded 
Ordnance, RDTE Bill/Bill Payer process and Acquisition Corps education requirements. As the BOD Secretariat, 
AMCRD-IT was instrumental in tracking action items, developing agenda topics and completing meeting 

AMC Support for Army Science and Technology Master Plan (ASTMP) 

During this time period significant resources were dedicated to supporting the HQDA annual up-date of the 
ASTMP. The ASTMP conveys the Army's vision, objectives, priorities, and investment strategy for the Science 
and Technology Program. AMC is one of the key members of the Army Science and Technology Working Group 
(ASTWG) and the Army Science and Technology Advisory Group (ASTAG). As such, AMC provided extensive 
update material and participated in comprehensive guidance development for the FY94 ASTMP coordination 
drafts. AMCRD-IT, along with TRADOC, Battle Labs, AMC RDECs, ARL and other MACOM representatives, 
participated in the Science and Technology Objectives (STOs) and Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) 
review and selection process. As the AMC focal point for the ASTMP, AMCRD-IT orchestrated AMC 
involvement in ASTMP Chapter Chair meetings. AMCRD-IT also managed subsequent draft updates to ASTMP 
Volumes I, II and III (the Resource Annex). The final ASTMP document is approved by CSA/SA and will be 
published in the December/January time frame. 

AMC Support to the Army RD&A Bulletin 

The Research, Development, and Acquisition (RD&A) Bulletin is a bimonthly professional development 
bulletin published by the Army Acquisition Executive Support Agency (AAESA). Its purpose is to disseminate 
RD&A processes, procedures, techniques, management philosophy and other information pertinent to 
professional development. Deputy Commanding General, AMC is the AMC member on the Editorial Advisory 
Board. The board meets biannually to suggest possible subjects for articles and provide general oversight 
regarding policies relating to the Bulletin. In accordance with Advisory Board guidance, AMCRD, the principal 
AMC agent, tasks appropriate AMC elements for articles. AMCRD-IT reviews them and ensures proper 
coordination is completed, required clearances are obtained and publication guidelines are met. Then it is sent 
out for DCSRDE approval and submission to the editor's office. During this time period AMC submitted eight 
articles for publication. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

AMC Support to the Army Science Board Call for Study Topics 

The Army Science Board (ASB) is the senior scientific advisory board for the Department of the Army. The 
ASB advises the Secretary of the Army, Chief of Staff, Army, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, 
Development and Acquisition, the Army Staff, and Major Army Commanders on scientific and technological 
matters of concern. The ASB performs most of its advisory functions through subgroup panels and studies. 
Annually a call is issued soliciting recommendations for Study topics. Topics submitted are to represent vital 
Army interests in order to take advantage of the significant capability the ASB has to offer. In support of this 
effort AMCRD invited AMC elements to provide candidate study topics for the ASB 1995. Twenty one topics 
were received and reviewed. Five were selected and approved by DCSRDE for input to the ASB. Selection was 
based on greatest impact and relevance to Army's needs and interests. 

U.S. Army Materiel Command S&T Accomplishments Brochure 

On 21 July 1993, Mr. George T. Singley, JH, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, 
requested AMC develop a Science and Technology (S&T) accomplishment publication using an ARL format 
A total of five companion brochures were to be developed representing the five Army S&T organizations. The 
AMC version was to include the seven AMC Research, Development and Engineering Centers (RDECs) as well 
as STRICOM. The completed AMC brochure was an 11 "X 16", 32 page, glossy, full color, photo oriented 
publication. Production and distribution of 5000 copies took place September 1994. 

LRRDAP Standard Automated System (LSAS) Upgrade 

The new RDA Report Writer was developed for the LSAS network. It was simply and reliably produce 
standard reports from dBase RDA files in the Long Range Research Development and Acquisition Plan 
(LRRDAP) format (e.g., the LRRDAP, the Program Objective Memorandum (POM), the Budget Estimate 
Submission (BES), and other planning documents). It creates the standard Funding and Delta Reports at several 
levels. These include the Detailed (each individual line of the file) level, at the Management Decision Package 
(MDEP)-Increment rollup level, and at the Standard Stock Number/Program Element (SSN/PE)-Project rollup 
level. These can now be organized by Battlefield Operating System (BOS) (as well as by Appropriation and 
Mission Area). It produces new Analysis Reports which proved to be useful in the last LRRDAP review cycle. 
It also includes a new User Defined Report writer which provides the capability to make Listing, Totals, and Delta 
Reports tailored to user needs. 

Science and Technology Objective Review 

The Science and Technology Objective (STO) states a specific, measurable, major technology advancement 
to be achieved by a specific fiscal year. The STO represents the most significant part of the Technology Base 
program. To provide guidance to the S&T community, the Army has established a set of 200 STOs. AMC is 
allocated 1 50 STOs, which constitute about one third of the AMC $888M S&T program. Most STOs are closely 
linked to the Louisiana Maneuvers (LAM) and the Battle Labs efforts. 

The user/developer review hosted by TRADOC, 18-21 April, provided the following key results for AMC 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

• Allocation of 1 50 STOs for inclusion in the Army Science and Technology Master Plan was met. Only 7 
of the 53 AMC STOs briefed to the user community were eliminated. 

• Highest priority given to Improved Spectrum Efficiency Model/Simulation, Digital Battlefield 
Communications and Integrated Biodetection. 

• Reviews required in efforts related to Helmet Mounted Displays, Automated Target Recognition and Multi- 
spectral techniques. 

• Resolution needed for Information On-the-Move technologies for duplication and overlap. 

On 9-10 May 1994, the Army S&T Working Group (ASTWG) reviewed all MACOM STOs. AMC will 
have about 137 STOs in FY95, after consolidations and eliminations. 

Technology Demonstration and Warfighting Experiments 

During this period, the emphasis was on moving information technology toward Force XXI through 
technology demonstrations and warfighting experiments. Every Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) 
is sponsored by and performs at least one experiment at a Battle Lab. AMC has 27 of the Army's 29 ATDs. In 
addition, competitively selected proposals from industry were funded by the Advanced Concepts and Technology 
II program, to provide a demonstration of promising technology and prototypes of keen interest to the Battle Labs 
and Louisiana Maneuvers. 

The OSD Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) initiative allows us to rapidly prototype 
promising technologies. We then provide them to the warfighting customer for evaluation. The Army has three 
approved ACTDs so far: Precision/Rapid Counter-Multiple Rocket sponsored by the Depth and Simultaneous 
Battle Lab; Rapid Force Protection Initiative/Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided Missile sponsored by the Early Entry 
Battle Lab; and Joint Countermine sponsored by TRADOC. 

A working group was created by SARD, ADO, LAM and AMC. It's duty was to synchronize the ATDs with 
Advanced Warfighting Experiments (AWEs) leading to Brigade digitization. This resulted from an advanced 
technology issue presented by SARD to the LAM General Officers' Working Group (GOWG) in August. Some 
links of the ATDs with the Joint Venture AWEs were found. Also, some issues uncovered the different paths 
of ATDs and AWEs. There was a lack of funding for new equipment training from ATD budgets and some risks 
associated with prematurely involving the ATDs in the Joint Venture activities. 

Battlefield Digitization 

During fiscal year 1994, RDTE Integration Division coordinated all AMC efforts for Battlefield Digitization. 
The Chief of Staff of the Army's vision is to have a digitized Brigade by 1996, Division by 1997 and Corps by 
1999. Specific actions accomplished included: 

• The orchestration of the briefings to the DA Digitization Special Task Force on AMC digitization-related 

• Refinement of the proposed digitization Management Decision Package. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

• Participation in the development of an Implementation Strategy and a Charter for the newly-formed Army 
Digitization Office. 

This Division took the lead in finalizing a Plan to provide necessary modeling and simulation support for this 
effort. In addition, action was initiated for the synchronization of selected AMC Advanced Technology 
Demonstrations with TRADOC's Advanced Warfighting Experiments. This will identify and insert promising 
technologies that enhance warfighting capabilities during this on-going effort 


Environmental Best Manufacturing Practices (EBMP) Program 

In February 1994, the U.S. Navy's Best Manufacturing Practices (BMP) Program established the subject 
program and the ensuing committee. The EBMP Program has several goals. First, to be a channel for the 
exchange of environmentally conscious best manufacturing practices. Second, to disseminate information 
regarding problems and solutions in pollution prevention, waste clean up, regulations and compliance, hazardous 
material control and tracking, education and training. Finally, to find ways for the government, industry, and 
academia to efficienUy and cost-effectively achieve a mutually constructive leadership role in the pollution 
prevention arena. 

AMCRD-E was the U.S. Army representative at the EBMP Committee. We participated in the organization 
of a workshop on "Environmental Issues in Industry" during the Annual Best Manufacturing Practices 
Conference. The workshop focused on the implementation of the National Aerospace Standard (NAS) 41 1 on 
contractor's Hazardous Materials Management Program. AMCRD-E is working on the update of the BMP's 
templates and "traps." This will incorporate Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing considerations in the 
industry surveys that the BMP Program conducts. 

Joint Group on Acquisition Pollution Prevention 

On 15 September 1994, the Joint Logistics Commanders signed a Charter establishing the subject group. 
The mission of the Joint Group is to: 

• Coordinate joint service activities affecting pollution prevention issues identified during a weapon system's 
acquisition process. 

• Assist the services' Program Managers to avoid duplicating efforts in reducing the requirement, procurement, 
and usage of hazardous materials in acquisition programs. 

• Support the reduction of hazardous materials by fostering joint service cooperation at contractors' 
manufacturing facilities with multiple contracts from multiple services. 

• Facilitate the implementation of Executive Orders 1 2856 (Federal Compliance with the Right-to-Know Laws 
and Pollution Prevention Requirements) and 12873 (Federal Acquisition, Recycling, and Waste Prevention) 
and the Secretary of Defense's Comprehensive Pollution Prevention Strategy. 

The DCSRDE, Headquarters U.S. Army Materiel Command is the U.S. Army's representative to the Joint 
Group. AMCRD-E is the U.S. Army representative at the Joint Pollution Prevention Advisory Group that 
supports the Joint Group in executing its mission. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

North American Technology and Industrial Base Organization (NATIBO) 

In March 1987, the Defense Departments of the United States and Canada signed a charter establishing the 
subject organization. The mission of the organization is twofold. First, to coordinate the activities of defense 
organizations supporting the North American Technology and Industrial Base. Second, to promote a cost 
effective, healthy base that is responsive to national and economic security needs. NATIBO established a 
Technology Base Enhancement (TBE) Working Group. The group will explore the joint activities potential in 
applying critical technologies to the North American Defense Industrial Base. 

AMCRD-E is supporting NATIBO's TBE Working Group in an AMCRD-E-proposed environmental 
technology study. The study is on Ion Beam Processing (IBP) Technologies as environmentally acceptable 
alternatives for Cadmium and Chromium plating/coating operations. The objectives of the study are to: 

assess the maturity of IBP technologies. 

assess the implications to the North American Industrial Base. 

identify dual-use opportunities. 

identify implementation barriers. 

identify viable corrective actions to overcome the implementation barriers. 

Pollution Prevention in the Acquisition Process - Outreach Program 

In support of the U.S. Army's Acquisition Pollution Prevention Program, an outreach program was 
implemented. It was to assist the Materiel Developer community infuse and implement pollution prevention 
methodologies and technologies throughout the acquisition of U.S. Army materiel. The outreach program 
consists of training for all levels of acquisition personnel, a monthly newsletter, a video, and a guide. 

AMCRD-E continues to support pollution prevention training needs for the U.S. Army's Acquisition 
Community at the following schools: 

• U.S. Army Logistics Management College (ALMC). 

• U.S. Army Management Engineering College (AMEC). 

• School of Engineering and Logistics (SEL). 

• Executive Courses and the Program Managers Course at the Defense Systems Management College. 

AMCRD-E funded six Executive Pollution Prevention seminars at various Major Subordinate Commands 
for Program Managers and Deputy Program Managers. Also, AMCRD-E supports the training needs of the Air 
Force's Acquisition Community. 

AMCRD-E continues to publish the monthly newsletter entitled: Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention 
News. The newsletter serves three purposes. It disseminates unclassified new pollution prevention information. 
It creates awareness within the Acquisition Community of available environmentally acceptable industrial 
technologies. And it identifies events and research efforts in the field of pollution prevention that impact the 
Acquisition Community. The information contained in the newsletter is in the public domain. Its circulation 
includes industry, academia, and other federal and defense agencies. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

AMCRD-E distributed the Materiel Developer's Guide for Pollution Prevention. The guide is a tool intended 
to raise awareness with the Acquisition Community regarding pollution prevention for environmental protection. 
The information contained in the guide is unclassified and releasable to the public. The principles discussed are 
primarily directed at the Materiel Developer and their staff. However, they also apply to staff personnel of the 
U.S. Army's industrial facilities, prime contractors, and their supplier base. The guide addresses pollution 
prevention as an integral element of the decision making process. It also identifies strategies to develop and 
execute pollution prevention early in the design phase of the U.S. Army's materiel. Finally, it answers the Why?; 
What?; How?; and Who? questions on pollution prevention in the Acquisition process. The guide is used as a 
text book by ALMC, AMEC, SEL, and DSMC. The U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy are also using the guide as 
a tool for their Acquisition Communities. AMCRD-E has initiated the process of updating the guide. It will 
reflect lessons learned and improved methodology on how to infuse pollution prevention into the materiel 
acquisition process. 

AMCRD-E continues to organize technical sessions for industry and academia, and participate as technical 
subject matter experts in National and International conferences. Also, AMCRD-E is assisting the U.S. Army 
National Guard Bureau develop the National Guard's Environmental Program. 

Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements 

On 3 August 1993, the President signed Executive Order (EO) 12856 "Federal Compliance with Right-to- 
Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements." This order specifies that the Federal Government should 
become a leader in the field of pollution prevention. It will do so through the management of facilities, 
acquisition practices, and developing innovative pollution prevention programs and technologies. Section 3-303 
of the EO requires the review and revision of all Standardized documents, including specifications and standards. 
This is to identify opportunities to eliminate or reduce the use of extremely hazardous substances and toxic 
chemicals. In addition, each agency shall plan for eliminating or reducing the unnecessary acquisition of 
extremely hazardous substances or toxic chemicals. Similarly, each Federal agency shall plan for voluntarily 
reducing its own manufacturing, processing, and use of extremely hazardous substances and toxic chemicals. 

AAPPSO was tasked by Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development and Acquisition 
(SARD A) to take the lead for the Army in execution of Section 3-303 of the EO. A Plan of Action was 
developed and approved by SARDA. Program Support requirements have been approved starting in FY95 and 
detailed a scope of work has been developed for FY95. The program will start in 1 st Quarter FY95 and continue 
through FY99. 

Pollution Prevention in the Manufacturing Process 

There are continuing efforts supporting the Army's Acquisition Pollution Prevention Program, assisting 
developers, manufacturers, and industry eliminate/reduce hazardous materials. Past efforts were supported by 
MANTECH but those funds are no longer available, and there have been no new efforts. The efforts that are still 
in process are: 

• The elimination of Chromate Conversion Coating pretreatment from the paint process for thick (5000 series) 
aluminum hulled Ml 13 vehicles. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

• A strategic plan for alternatives for Cadmium plating processes is being prepared for distribution in early 

• Alternative cleaning processes to eliminate the use of solvents and Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) is being 
supported at CCAD. 

• Ion Implantation Process has been installed at Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD) and is the first 
production process in DOD. 

• Final testing and evaluation of a non-volatile organic compound (VOC), E-coat process primer alternative 
is underway at CCAD. The system will be operational for small parts starting in November 1994. 

Toxicological Support to the Armored System Modernization Program 

The Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention Support Office (AAPPSO) established a joint initiative with the 
U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine (CHPPM). This initiative was specifically in 
the areas of active toxicological assessment for pollution prevention in the acquisition process. CHPPM supports 
the Army Preventative Medicine Program through toxicological review, consultation, and testing. They assess 
the health hazards associated with the uses of chemicals used or proposed for use by the Army. A Liaison 
position was established between CHPPM and AAPPSO. The liaison coordinates, manages, and provides 
technical guidance on toxicity issues to the development, logistics and acquisition communities. Coordination 
with the Army Medical Community is also provided. 

Work is underway to assist PM, Armored Gun Systems (AGS) with the identification of viable alternatives 
for Halon 1301. Halon 1301 is the Army's Mission Critical explosion suppressant agent, used in the occupied 
areas of tactical vehicles. Toxicology is the main driving force in the identification of the new replacement. This 
action is coordinated through CHPPM, and the office of the Army Surgeon General. It requires the development 
of Toxicity Profiles, identification of needed toxicity work, and the performance of required toxicity testing. 
Work is also in progress to find a replacement for Halon 1301 in the engine compartments of these vehicles. 

Toxicity Profiles for Perfluorohexane, Dessikarb, FM-200, Iodotrifluoromethane, PGA and FE-13, all 
possible replacement candidates, have been completed. These profiles include a collection of available toxicity 
information from manufacturers, literature, and the National Library of Medicine. The toxicity studies were 
reviewed, evaluated and recommendation made on additional toxicological testing requirements. Additional 
Toxicity Profiles on possible new candidate materials are in progress. 

The Toxicity Profile for Dessikarb identified deficiencies in toxicity information necessary for a final 
Toxicity Clearance. Acute inhalation toxicity testing with Dessikarb has been completed. Dessikarb was 
classified as nontoxic following acute inhalation testing and had no potential for acute primary eye or skin 

Genotoxicity testing is in-progress with Dessikarb, PGA and FE-13. Developmental and Reproductive 
testing is being planned for FE-13. This toxicity information will assist in identifying the best alternatives to 
replace Halon 1301 for fire fighting and explosion suppression. It will be used to develop a Toxicity Clearance 
for approval of the final candidate chosen. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Utilization of Non-Military Specifications and Standards 

To reduce the reliance on using military standards and specifications, the Army Acquisition Pollution 
Prevention Support Office (AAPPSO) signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MO A) with the American Society 
for Testing and Materials (ASTM). The objective is to develop ASTM Standards, Specifications, and Test 
Methods for the substitution of hazardous and environmentally unacceptable materials. The initial effort focused 
on substitutes for Ozone depleting chemicals such as Halon 1301, an explosion suppressant and fire protection 

There is no replacement now for Halon 1301. It is used by the Army in its mission-critical application to 
extinguish fires in a combat vehicle's occupied area. Production of Halon 1301 ended 1 January 1994, thus the 
importance of recycling available Halon 1301 to prepare for future combat scenarios. The ability to recycle 
existing Halon 1301 in fire extinguishers and fixed fire suppression systems is critical. To accomplish the 
recycling, a new material specification for Halon 1301 was required. 

The new specification addressed the problem of nitrogen in the vapor phase. Nitrogen is used as a propellent 
and is added to pure Halon 1301 in fire extinguishers. As the Halon 1301 is removed the nitrogen is also 
extracted. The process of removing the nitrogen to conform to the original military specification is expensive 
and not necessary. The original military specification did not adequately address this problem. 

Because of AAPPSO's efforts, ASTM established a subcommittee (D26.09) on Fire Extinguishing Agents. 
It is part of their D26 Committee on Halogenated Organic Solvents. This Committee is now known as the 
Committee on Halogenated Organic Solvents and Fire Extinguishing Agents. The subcommittee develops and 
maintains material specifications, standards and test methods for the packing, transportation, storage and 
handling of fire extinguishing agents. ASTM selected AAPPSO to lead the new subcommittee activities. 

AAPPSO provided leadership and technical expertise to produce the first non-government standard (ES 24- 
93, Emergency Standard Specification for Halon 1301, Bromotrifluoromethane, CF 3 Br, ) in record time under 
the MOA. The Emergency Standard is valid for two years. This standard and a Standard on Transportation, 
Storage and Handling of Halon 1301, have just completed the full ASTM balloting process. The final review 
and publication of these ASTM standards should be completed by February of 1995. They will be good for five 

The D26.09 Subcommittee is also developing an ASTM Provisional Material Specification for CF3I for non- 
occupied areas. CF3I is a candidate replacement for Halon 1301 . The CF3I Material Specification will be used 
to standardize the chemical for testing before a production Specification can be produced. 

AAPPSO has initiated and assisted in the development of additional standards in other ASTM Committees. 
In E35.26, The Safety to Man Subcommittee, a Standard Method to Perform Cardiac Sensitization Studies has 
been developed and is in the ASTM balloting process. This standard method will assist in the Toxicological 
screening process of future alternative Halon 1301 replacements. In the E50.03 Subcommittee, on Pollution 
Prevention, Reuse, Recycling and Waste Reduction, AAPPSO is assisting in the development of ASTM Pollution 
Prevention Standards with a special emphasis on Source Reduction. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

Process Action Team (PAT) on Military Specifications and Standards 

In August 1993, the Deputy Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Reform chartered a Process Action Team 
(PAT) on Military Specifications and Standards. The purpose of the PAT was to make recommendations leading 
to significantly reducing DOD's reliance on military specifications and standards. The majority of the work was 
conducted in FY94. Mr. Darold Griffin, Principal Deputy for Acquisition Reform, HQ AMC, served as the 
Executive Director. HQ AMC provided facilities for the 36-person PAT and financial support for the project. 
DCSRDE provided administrative support and a senior engineer on a full time basis to the project. The results 
were briefed to and approved by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. 

In June 1994 the Secretary of Defense directed the Defense Agencies and Military Services to implement the 
PAT report's recommendations. Headquarters, AMC was given Army-wide responsibility to develop the Army's 
Implementation Plan. An Army Specification and Standards Action Team was formed to develop the plan and 
DCSRDE was given the lead. Significant implementation progress was made. A target date of November 1994 
established for distributing the Army's plan under the signature of the Army Acquisition Executive. In 
recognition of AMC's and Mr. Griffin's contribution, Mr. Griffin received the Secretary of Defense Meritorious 
Civilian Service Award. 

Pollution Prevention in the Acquisition Process — Program Support to the Materiel Developer 

In support of the U.S. Army's Acquisition Pollution Prevention Program, the Army Acquisition Pollution 
Prevention Support Office (AAPPSO) continued to assist Materiel Developers. AAPPSO aided in the systematic 
elimination, reduction, or control of hazardous or environmentally unacceptable materials and manufacturing 
processes. These pollution prevention efforts are tailored for each system. This takes into account the acquisition 
phase, the available funding, and is consistent with procuring activity projections of the scope and probability 
of subsequent systems acquisition. A notable effort for the M1A2 Abrams Tank System has already been 
completed. Some other notable continuing efforts are for both the Army and Air Force Aviation community: 
Blackhawk, Comanche and the HI, H53 and H60 for the A.F. 

The Abrams Tank Systems completed Phase II (Engineering and Manufacturing Development) for the Ml A2 
upgrade effort. It also received Milestone HI, Production Approval, for a large foreign military sales procurement. 
AAPPSO developed the Programmatic Environmental Analysis for Project Manager - Ml A2 Abrams Tank 
Systems, provided oversight to the PM's Environmental Management Team, and published the Environmental 
Assessment, as well as the Finding of No Significant Impact, for public comment. AAPPSO prepared the draft 
environmental documentation for the Milestone decision review, and was also prepared to defend the Ml A2 
environmental issues and concerns should they have surfaced. 

The Blackhawk is a mature program, having gone through years of production. AAPPSO reviewed the 
Technical Documentation (Technical Manuals, Depot Maintenance Work Requirements, etc.) for consistency with 
the National Policy of Pollution Prevention. They identified all uses of hazardous materials and recommended 
material or manufacturing process alternatives. Currently, they are conducting limited testing of those 
alternatives to ensure operational performance requirements are met. Technical document changes are expected 
to take place after testing has been completed. 

The Comanche is now in a restructured, accelerated program (combined Phase I and II). AAPPSO is the 
pollution prevention advisor to the program and a member of the Comanche System Safety Working Group. It 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

oversees the contractual efforts to systematically eliminate hazardous and environmentally unacceptable materials 
as well as the development of the Programmatic Environmental Analysis. 

In support of Air Force System Program Offices, AAPPSO assists the Special Operations Group at Warner 
Robins Air Logistics Center. AAPPSO is analyzing the technical orders and the depot maintenance work 
requirements for the H- 1 , H-53 and H-60 aircraft. It is eliminating references to hazardous and environmentally 
unacceptable materials and processes. For this effort, AAPPSO is: 

• Analyze each technical document to identify products and processes that contain or use hazardous materials. 

• Identify the maintenance activity that implements the processes. 

• Analyze each process or procedure. 

• Assess the quantity of hazardous materials used. 

• Establish a priority list for the elimination of hazardous materials. 

• Recommend alternatives or areas of research and development for those products which cannot be eliminated 
through the use of current technology. 

This effort is similar to which was conducted for the Army Blackhawk helicopter. 

The above are but a few of the Army programs receiving direct support from AAPPSO. AAPPSO is also 
directly supporting acquisition programs in the Navy and Marine Corps. 

Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Elimination of Ozone-Depleting Chemicals (ODCs) 

AAPPSO is responsible for implementing the Strategic Plan for Elimination of Ozone-Depleting Chemicals 
(ODCs). Two In-Process Reviews (IPR) have provided Army-wide coordination in implementing the effort. 

AMCRD-E was assigned as the Army lead for ODCs elimination by DASA(ESOH). It began the 
development of a strategic plan to eliminate ODCs in Army facilities. A survey of installations was conducted 
to identify types of uses of ODCs in facility applications. The plan will review policy and provide guidance for 
use by installations in the development of individual retrofit/replacement projects. Potential alternatives in the 
areas of fire suppression, refrigeration and solvents will also be included. The final draft is scheduled to be 
distributed for comment by December 1994. 

In January 1994, a Joint CECOM/ATCOM effort to retrofit ODCs in weapon systems began in Germany. 
It was completed in August 1994. The retrofit program will eliminate uses of Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) -12 
in field air conditioning units. Approximately 500 communications and maintenance systems were modified over 
the six month period. The retrofit of CONUS-based systems was also began with Fort Campbell, Kentucky in 
July 1994. Over 1300 additional systems will be modified by the time the effort is completed in December 1995. 

Army Policy on the National Defense Authorization Act for FY93 (Public Law 102-484), Section 326, was 
revised to simplify the reporting procedures. Quarterly reports on approvals granted, including ODC 
requirements in Army contracts, were submitted to OSD for the consolidated Congressional report. The majority 
of approvals granted involve the continued uses of ODCs as solvents. 

AMCRD-E utilized Corpus Christi Army Depot as the Army Center of Excellence for Solvents. It will 
identify those uses of ODC solvents, specifically related to aircraft maintenance, without approved alternative 


Materiel Acquisition AMCRD 

agents or technologies. The effort was further expanded to survey all Army depots for continuing ODCs 
requirements. An ODCs alternative matrix is under development. It is being considered as an ASTM standard 
in the spirit of the Blueprint for Change. 

Testing and evaluation of halon 1301 alternative agents and technologies was started for two automatic fire 
suppression applications. A contract was awarded by TACOM to test commercially available substitutes in the 
engine compartments of ground combat vehicle. These tests are being conducted at the Combat Systems Test 
Activity, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD. Testing of water mist technology was also initiated as a potential 
replacement for halon 1301 systems on Army watercraft. This effort is being conducted in conjunction with the 
Naval Research Laboratory. 

A contract was awarded by TACOM for the purchase of C0 2 handheld fire extinguishers as replacement for 
halon 1301 extinguishers. A commercial item description (CID) was used for this procurement action. These 
extinguishers will be used to replace halon extinguishers in ground combat vehicles, Army aircraft and selected 
communications-electronics systems. 


Budd Light and the Combat Identification Panel (CIP) 

The Combat Identification Task Force General Officer Steering Committee (GOSC) endorsed the selection 
of the Budd Light and the CIP as the U.S. Army Quick Fix Combat Identification package. Budd Light is a 
pulsed IR beacon employed as an aid for personnel and vehicle identification. CIP is a panel covered with thermal 
tape. It provides a contrasting cold spot on the target image through a thermal sight. The GOSC also 
recommended reprogramming funds to field the Quick Fix package to the contingency Corps, forward deployed 
divisions, and to contingency stocks. DA released $5.75 Million for the initial fielding of CIPs to the contingency 
Corps and the U.S. Eighth Army. Production of CIPs was provided by the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive 
Command, Industrial Operations Command, and ARL. Fielding is complete for the 24th Infantry Division, 82nd 
Airborne Division, and the 1st Cavalry Division. The total fielding will be completed in August 1995. National 
Guard units and the U.S. Marines will begin fielding CIPs early 1995. The NATO Armaments Group reported 
that the U.S. Army Quick Fix package will be employed if NATO is deployed. This is the first major anti- 
fratricide fielding and has accomplished the U.S. Army's Quick Fix commitment to Congress. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 


Key Personnel 
LTG John G. Coburn Deputy Commanding General 

Michael F. Fisette 
COL Ernest E. Bubb 
Aaron L. Mahr 
Rodney W. Smith 
Theresa C. Norman 

Principal Deputy for Technology 

Chief, Office for International Cooperative Programs 

Chief, Multilateral Programs Division 

Chief, Bilateral Programs Division 

Administrative Officer 

Organization and Key Personnel ' 

The International Cooperative Programs Activity 
(ICPA) was provisionally organized on 1 October 
1993. Following negotiations with Headquarters, 
Department of the Army, the Concept Plan was 
approved on 15 July 1994 and Permanent Orders 
87-1, directing the formal establishment of the ICPA, 
were published on 20 July 1994. 

The new organization established a new Separate 
Reporting Activity (SRA) and eliminated five older 
ones. Cost savings in excess of $180,000 annually 
were achieved by eliminating one Senior Executive 
Service (SES) position, downgrading a GS-15, a 
GS-14 and a GS-13 position one grade level each, 
eliminating one GS-6 secretary position, and reducing 
one Colonel billet to a Major. The total authorized 
manpower for the office consisted of 3 military slots 
and 21 civilian slots. 

Other measures taken were the submission of 
one, instead of five, Table of Distribution and 
Allowances (TDA) and consolidated budget 
submissions. Both the overall grade point average 
and the supervisor-to-employee ratio were lowered, 
helping AMC achieve objectives outlined by Vice President Gore's National Performance Review. 

During FY94, the newly emerging SRA kept pace with the rapid changes in world politics and technology. 
New efforts were launched with countries of the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, while efforts with 
traditional allies and friendly foreign nations continued. The U.S. Army moved to Operations Other Than War 
(OOTW) and Peacekeeping Operations as part of multinational forces. 

FY94 Interpreters' Key Activities 

Given the serious requirement for language support in Army international programs, AMC interpreters wrote 
an Army-wide Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Language Services with the Department of State. 
Instead of a MOU for each Army MACOM and MSC, this MOU covers all Army users of language services. 
It also allows funds to be transferred to the State Department for interpreting and translation under the Economy 
Act when in-house services are not available. 


United Kingdom Colonel Henry Atwood, Commander, USARDSG-UK, 

9-0 11 -447 1 -5 14-49 11, FAX 9-0 11 -447 1-724- 1433 
LTC Charles Hintze, Commander, USARDSG- AS, Unit 
1 1007, ATTN: AMCICP-A, APO AP 96549-5000 
9-01 1-616-265-3943, 9-01 1-616-257-1368 
LTC Ron Janowski, Commander, USARDSG-CA, 
National Defence Headquarters, MGEN George R. 
Peakes Building, Ottawa, Canada K 1 A OK 2 
9-1-61 3-992-5737, FAX 9- 1 -6 1 3-0829 
Colonel James Bald, Commander, USARDSG-GE, 
American Embassy, Bonn, Germany, Box 165, Unit 
21701, APO AE 09080 
9-01 1-49-228-3392721, FAX 49-228-333-601 
LTC William J. Kiskowski, USARDSG-France, Paris 
Embassy (ODC), PSC 1 16, Box 400, APO AE 09777- 

9-01 1-33-14-296-1202, FAX 9-01 1-33-14-261-6135 
Colonel Steve Roop, Mutual Defense Assistance Office, 
American Embassy, Unit 45004, Box 225, APO AP 
96337-5004, Tokyo, Japan 
9-01 1-81-3-324-5414, FAX 9-01 1-81-3-3224-5418 






'Unless otherwise specified all information in this section is taken from the Office for International 
Cooperative Program's historical submission for FY94. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

AMC interpreters worked at 25 meetings in FY94, including: 

• 4-Power National Armaments Directors (NADS) 

• 4-Power Senior National Representatives — Army (SNR-A) 

• U.S7French Army Staff Talks 

• Conference on National Armaments Directors (CNAD) Ad hoc Group on Theater Missile Defense 

• EuroSatory Land Armaments Show: 

• Developed itineraries and translated for LTG Forster (Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army 
for Research, Development, and Acquisition [AS A(RDA)]) and BG Franklin (Director, Army International 
Programs) for their visits to EuroSatory, and their meetings with the French Chief of Staff of the Army and 
other French defense officials. 

There were two special translation projects. The first was to translate a list of commonly used military 
phrases from Operation Desert Storm for a Lincoln Labs multilingual speech demonstration project sponsored 
by Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). The second was a letter from French Delegation Generale pour 
1'Armement (DGA) Chief Conze to Deputy Secretary of Defense Deutch on the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) Partnership For Peace. 

The interpreters also certified the linguistic accuracy of the French versions of: 

• The Data Exchange Agreement on Battlefield Identification of Friend or Foe (BIFF) 

• The WIESEL robotic vehicle test program agreement. 

American. British. Canadian and Australian (ABCA) Armies Program 

The bi-annual ABCA TEAL XXXI Conference was held in Ontario, Canada 15-17 June 1994. The U.S. 
Head of Delegation (HOD) was General J.H. Binford Peay HI, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army. All support 
materials for the Vice were prepared by AMC, in conjunction with the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations 
(DCSOPS), and the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC). The following AMC staff attended the 
conference: Mr. Michael F. Fisette, AMC Principal Deputy for Technology (Deputy HOD), Dr. J. Russell 
Wilsthire, U.S. Deputy Washington Standardization Officer and Mr. Lawrence F. Beck, U.S. National 
Standardization Officer. 

The ABCA Program allowed a degree of standardization not possible in bilateral efforts and focused efforts 
on a broad range of issues not available in other forums. It was agreed that efforts must continue to maintain 
Program flexibility and broaden Program interest in combined issues. Accordingly the conference spent a great 
deal of time discussing Operations Other Than War, and Peacekeeping Operations. 

Considerable benefits are drawn from the ABCA Exercise Program. The most valuable and pertinent aspect 
of the Program is the evaluation of Standardization Agreements and their relevance to operations. 

Defense Data Exchange Program (DDEP) 

Since the end of the Cold War, the world has continued to change and military forces have continued to 
downsize. Nonetheless the DDEP remains integral to U.S. efforts to strengthen existing relationships and forge 
new affiliations by exploring opportunities for cooperation. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

As a result of the updated Army Data Exchange Annex (DEA) policy and the successful efforts of all 
involved participants (Department of the Army (DA), AMC, Army Research Laboratory (ARL) and Research, 
Development, and Engineering Centers (RDEC), Senior Level Army to Army Working Groups and Executive 
Level Country Reviews), considerable progress has been made in revitalizing the DDEP. Annexes which were 
no longer essential have been terminated and new Annexes with greater potential have been established. 

Over the past four years the total number of dea/ieas by year 

r J 1991 1992 1993 1994 

Army DEA/IEAs (Information Exchange Annex) has established: 291 250 251 217 

been reduced as follows: proposed: 57 60 68 54 

TOTAL: 348 310 319 271 

With 54 proposed DEAs/IEAs in staffing, it is clear that there is strong interest within the Army community 
for the program. The increased focus on the program has ensured that proposed DEAs/IEAs are well thought 
out. They are designed to leverage allied/friendly nation technology to meet the goals of the Army Science 
Technology Master Plan and enhance our standardization and interoperability. 

Scientist and Engineer Exchange Program (SEEP) 

During 1994, SEEP was expanded to include Short-Term Exchanges, generally of 90-120 days, and not to 
exceed 1 1 months. This greatly expanded the numbers of U.S. Scientists and Engineers going abroad. The vision 
of the Short-Term program is to have Army scientists and engineers globally recognized for their expertise by 
interacting with international academe, industry and government laboratories. Twelve Army defense 
professionals participated in the Short-Term SEEP during 1994. 

Command Group Trips Overseas 

The Executive Level Annual Review of ICP and Discussions of Major Programs were undertaken by the 
Deputy Commanding General (DCG) and the Principal Deputy for Technology. Between 24 and 29 October 
1994, they visited Germany, Britain, and France and met face-to-face with decision makers, reaffirmed our 
commitment to cooperation, and provided top level management oversight and guidance. They observed that, 
as forward deployed forces draw down, the importance of standardization groups increases dramatically. They 
also saw a potential for additional cooperative programs in each country, and that SEEP is an effective tool for 
collaborative work. 

"International Day" at the U.S. Army Battle Labs 

The AMC Principal Deputy for Technology invited the Defense Attaches from the Australian, British, 
Canadian, French, and Germany Embassies to tour the U.S. Army Battle Labs during FY94. The allies gained 
an understanding of how the Battle Labs operate and established important contacts. 

The "International Day" visits to the Battle Labs began with the Depth and Simultaneous Attack Battle Lab 
at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, then continued with the Combat Service Support Battle Lab at Fort Lee, Virginia, the 
Mounted Battle Space Battle Lab at Fort Knox, Kentucky, the Dismounted Battle Space Battle Lab at Fort 
Benning, Georgia, the Battle Command Battle Lab at Fort Gordon, Georgia, and ended with the visit to the Early, 
Entry, Lethality, and Survivability Battle Lab at Fort Monroe, Virginia. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

After the visits were completed, OICP assisted the Battle Labs in evaluating allied equipment. OICP will 
begin procedures for inserting foreign technology into each of the Battle Labs through AMCRD-IT. 

Far East 

The Far East Country Desk Officer, Mr. John O'Brien, went on a one year development assignment to the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). Mr. Al Trawnski was selected as a temporary Far East Desk Officer. 

The U.S ./Korean Defense Technological and Industrial Committee and Technological Cooperation 
Subcommittee Meetings were held at Camp Smith, Hawaii. A complete OSD level review of all U.S./Korean 
RD&A Programs was completed. 

There were no changes to the number or status of DEAs and MOUs during this time. 

AMC Loan Program 

The AMC Loan Program operates under Section 65 of the Arms Export Control Act. It provides that 
materiel, systems, and equipment can be loaned to or borrowed from NATO allies and major non-NATO allies. 
These loans are for the purposes of research, development, and evaluation, including standardization and 

In FY94, the Office for International Cooperative Programs (OICP) had several active loans. The Single 
Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS) and Tactical Quiet Generators were loaned to 
Canada, while Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) C9 machine gun parts were borrowed from Canada for testing. 
The Quick Fix Combat Identification System was loaned to Germany and France, and the M242 Chain Gun 
loaned to the Netherlands. One on-going loan with the United Kingdom of a Com Oil Respirator Test System 
has been extended an additional year. Several other loans were cancelled as a result of foreign administrative 

AMC Emergency Operations 

OICP requested that the Canadian and British logistics experts on U.N. peacekeeping operations in Bosnia 
come to AMC HQ and brief the Command Staff. The Canadian logistics planner for their U.N. Operation in 
Bosnia, LTC John Furrie, briefed the Command Logistics Operations Center (C-LOC) and the Chief of Staff, 
Major General McCoy. OICP was also able to have the United Kingdom's logistics expert, Major Jeff Mason, 
brief the AMC C-LOC and Major General McCoy on their U.N. Operations in Bosnia. Both officers provided 
much needed insight into the logistics problems encountered by the Canadian and the British peacekeeping forces. 
Both the Canadian and British officers emphasized the tremendous costs involved in running a Peacekeeping 
operation. They warned that the costs must be dealt with by the logisticians at the beginning of each 
peacekeeping operation. The AMC general officers were also briefed on how U.N. logistics operations are 
conducted and the many difficulties in conducting "Chapter 6 and Chapter 7" U.N. Operations. 


DEAs signed: 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

131 1 Hazardous Materials/Material Substitutes/ Air (February 1994) 

1520 Soil (February 1994) 

1521 Water (February 1994) 

1522 Demilitarization and Disposal of Conventional Munitions (February 1994) 
1518 Near-Term Battlefield Identification Systems (November 1993) 

1512 Mid-Term Battlefield Identification (October 1994) 

Engineer and Scientist Exchange Program. In April 1 994, German engineers reported to Armament 
Research, Development, and Engineering Center (ARDEC), Aviation Technical Test Center, TECOM, CECOM, 
ATCOM (2), and Program Executive Office Communications Control Systems (PEO CCS) for one year tours. 

In October 1994, one German engineer reported to Natick Research, Development, and Engineering Center 
(NRDEC) and one to the Edgewood Research, Development, and Engineering Center (ERDEC) for a one year 


The vast majority of the U.S ./French armaments cooperative efforts take place within a unique framework 
of seven bilateral, general officer level working groups. These working groups mirror AMC's commodity and 
functionally oriented command and are charged with the international cooperative mission within their area of 
responsibility. The seven materiel working groups are: 

Mobility Electronics/Communications 

Weapons/ Munitions Technology Base 

NBC Helicopters 

These working groups meet a minimum once annually to review ongoing efforts and chart the future. The 
entire U.SVFrance Country Program is reviewed annually by the DCG and his counterparts in the French 
Delegation Generale pour 1'Armement (DGA). The most recent Country Program Review was conducted on 27 
October 1994 by LTG Coburn and Mr. Michael Fisette, Principal Deputy for Technology and Director for 
International Cooperative Programs Activity. 

Significant U.S./France Cooperative Activities 1994 

Electric Armaments Technologies: In February 1994, representatives from the U.S. Army Research, 
Development, and Engineering Center (ARDEC) met with French and German officials to initiate a trilateral 
research and development effort in the area of electric armaments. It was agreed to pursue cooperative projects 
in the areas of rail gun technology, hypervelocity projectiles and power supplies. The French and German 
governments have a robust, well funded bilateral electric armaments program from which the U.S. can acquire 
needed technologies to reduce overall R&D costs. 

Combat ID Technologies: Throughout this report period the SNR-A Combat ID working group continued 
their activities aimed at the simultaneous deployment of an interoperable, next generation Combat ID system. 
Currently, a 4-Power Battlefield Combat Identification System (BCIS) interoperability demonstration is 
scheduled for the third and fourth quarters of C Y96. In addition the French Army conducted operational testing 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

on the currently available U.S. Quick Fix combat ID equipment during June/July of 1994. These tests will allow 
French to quickly integrate Quick Fix systems on selected combat platforms in the event of near-term, coalition 

Simulation Technologies: The 5th Annual U.S./Franee Conference on simulation was held in Paris, 2-4 May 
1994. The U.S. HOD, Mr Walt Hollis (DUSA-OR), reviewed with his French counterparts the significant 
bilateral activities and projects in the area of simulation. A key outcome of the conference was a project to link 
together the French and U.S. versions of the JANUS wargame over the Distributed Interactive Simulation 
Network (DISN). Scheduled to be completed in March 1995, this linkage will permit our soldiers to conduct cost 
effective combined warfare simulations with the French, and permit the identification and evaluation of equipment 
interoperability and doctrinal issues. 

Armored Vehicles Technologies: The annual meeting of the Mobility Working Group took place at the 
Tank- Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Center (TARDEC) on 15-17 March 1994. The host 
and U.S. co-chairman was the Technical Director of TARDEC, Mr. Wayne Wheelock. The French co-chairman 
was Ingenieur Generate de rArmement (IGA) Perrot, Chief of the Mobility Division, Direction des Armenments 
Terrestres (DAT). During the meeting the status and activity of the nine DEAs managed by this group were 
reviewed. Other events related to this working group included: 

Joint T&E of Robotic Vehicle: The U.S. and France conducted a joint test and evaluation of the 
TACOM developed robotic WIESEL vehicle in April 1994. The test was conducted in Angers, France. Two 
TACOM engineers accompanied the robotic vehicle and participated in the test. A joint test report was developed 
and published, and serves as the baseline for future cooperative R&D in the area of military robotics. Specific 
projects in video compression, land navigation, soldier-machine interface and communication protocols are being 
jointly pursued. 

Hydropneumatic Suspension Loan: The Assistant for the Army (RDA) authorized the loan of a U.S. 
developed hydropneumatic suspension system the French in July 1994. France will conduct tests on this 
suspension system and provide a report comparing the U.S. system to those developed by France. 

Missile Technologies: The annual meeting of the Missile Working Group was held at MICOM 27-29 April 
1994. The U.S. host and co-chairman was Major General Rigby, Commander of MICOM. The principals agreed 
to focus in future cooperative efforts in three areas: neural networks, hypervelocity missiles and dual mode seeker 

Communications/Electronics Technologies: The annual meeting of the U.S/France Communications 
/Electronics Working Group was held at CECOM 9-1 1 May 1994. The U.S. co-chairman and host was Major 
General Gunther, Commander of CECOM. The French co-chairman was IGA Nicolas, Director of Section des 
Etudes et Fabrication des Telecommunications (SEFT), DGA. The principals reviewed the status of the seven 
DEAs under their purview and spent considerable time discussing the future of cooperative efforts. Battlefield 
interoperability of Command, Control, Communication, and Computer (C4) systems was clearly the overriding 
theme of the meeting. It was agreed to pursue projects in the following areas: Command and Control (C2) on the 
move, machine translation, multi-sensing, optical thin film coating asynchronous transfer mode switching, mine 
detection and helicopter detection. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

Helicopter Technologies: The annual meeting of the U.S./France Helicopter Working Group was held on 
10 May 1994 in Washington DC. The U.S. co-chairman was Mr. Robert Kennedy, Associate Director for 
Technology at Aviation Research, Development, and Engineering Center (AVRDEC). The French co-chairman 
was Mr. Fenton, Deputy Director of Service Technique des Programmes d'Armement (STPA), Directions des 
Constructions Aeronautiques (DCAe), DGA. The meeting involved discussions under the two helicopter DEAs 
and discussions on the draft Helicopter Aeromechanics MOU. Cooperative initiatives resulting from this meeting 
included joint R&D in the areas of pilot vision, open architectures/affordable avionic, and sensor fusion. Later 
on 27 October 1994 the Helicopter MOU was signed in France and placed into effect. 

Technology Base: The 9th U.SVFrance Technology Base Working Group meeting was held in Paris, France 
from 19-23 September 1994. The meeting was hosted by IGA Calenge, co-chairman of the working group and 
Deputy Director for Direction des Recherches, Etudes, et Techniques (DRET). The U.S. delegation was led by 
Mr. Vito Demonte, Director of ARL's S3I Directorate and U.S. co-chairman of the working group. The 
co-chairmen reviewed the 10 existing DEA's which fall under the purview of the working group and concluded 
they were all active and productive. They also validated the following joint R&D projects which are in various 
stages of staffing: Ceramic armor; data compression for robotics; adiabatic shearing of metals; composite 
material failure mechanisms; impact damage to ceramics; low cost Millimeter Wave (MMW) antennas; conformal 
antennas; automatic target recognition (ATR); and the linkage of U.S./France simulations over the DISN. It was 
also agreed to explore potential cooperative efforts in the field on non-lethal weapons. Agreements negotiated 
and concluded during this report period included a DEA on Robotics and a DEA on Photonics/Optronics. 

Nuclear, Biological, Chemical (NBC) Defense Technologies: The annual NBC Working Group meeting 
was held in Paris from 11-15 July 1994. The host and co-chairman was IGA Eon, Director of the French NBC 
Research Center at Bouchet. The U.S. co-chairman was Mr. Vervier, acting Technical Director of the U.S. Army 
Chemical and Biological Defense Agency. The co-chairmen reviewed the activity of the six DEAs under the 
working group and refined the plans for the Phase II MOU on the Laser Standoff Chemical Detector Program. 
Phase II will be a $24M, three-year effort to improve the detectors' capabilities, manufacture, and explore 
dual-use opportunities, Phase II is expected to begin the second quarter of FY95. 

Scientists & Engineers Exchange Program: A bilateral MOU renewing the U.S ./France Scientists & 
Engineers Exchange Program was signed and placed into effect in February 1994. In addition the U.S. Army 
Research Laboratory inaugurated its Abbreviated Professional Exchange (APEX) program in the summer of 1994 
and sent three scientists to France. Dr. Larry Merkle spent three months at the University of Lyon working with 
a world class French team in the area of laser materials. Drs. Allender and dePontbriand, both of ARL/Human 
Research and Engineering Directorate (HRED), spent three months at the French Center for Human Factors, 
Angers, France. During their exchange Drs. Allender and dePontbriand worked in the areas of soldier 
survivability and human system modeling and simulation. 

Acquisition Excellence: Support to this core competency is accomplished primarily through the Foreign 
Comparative Test (FCT) Program. The purpose of the FCT program is to avoid the R&D costs associated with 
a new materiel requirement by adopting a foreign-developed system. We assist the materiel developer in 
identifying, procuring and evaluating candidate systems. During the 1994 year period there were three French 
developed systems which underwent evaluation: the individual reserve parachute, a wireless Combat Vehicle 
Crewman (CVC) helmet communications system, and a focal plane array. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

Logistics Power Projection: Support to this core competency is accomplished primarily through the 
standardization/interoperability mission. Standardization and interoperability of munitions and fuels, etc., are 
normally achieved through multinational forums such as NATO. During this report, the most important activities 
in the area took place under the auspices of the 155mm Joint Ballistic MOU. The basic purpose of the MOU is 
to standardize elements of new 155mm guns and howitzers to ensure the ability to interchange ammunition. 
On-going efforts include developing a fuze annex, work on Extended Range Ordnance (ERO) risk factors, and 
information exchange on liquid and insensitive munitions. 

EuroSatory 1994: The USARDSG-France was heavily involved in supporting U.S. participation in 
EuroSatory 1994, a biennial land armaments exposition which took place from 20-25 June 1994 at Paris Le 
Bourget. It marked the first time U.S. companies were invited to participate and also the first time that the 
Department of Defense (DOD) officially sanctioned and supported the U.S. pavilion. 


The U.SVSweden Cooperative program efforts in armaments cooperation have taken place under the existing 
Data Exchange Program signed in 1992. There are 18 Data Exchange Annexes with moderate activity. Several 
visits by AMC and its Major Subordinate Commands (MSC) took place during this reporting period in order to 
increase activity and create new DEA agreements. 

The U.S ./Sweden DEA review took place at HQAMC 19 May 1994. Purpose of this review was conduct 
extensive management decision on the established/proposed DEAs activity and progress, discuss issues 
concerning DEA policy, existing MOUs, Scientists and Engineers Exchange Program, future visits, etc. 

A visit to Sweden in September 1994 was made by AMC/CECOM/MICOM to the Swedish Materiel 
Command, Forsuarets Materiel Verk (FMV), and the industry to make assessment of the existing technologies 
in Swedish industry. Follow up visit has been made by MICOM and CECOM tc discuss concrete areas for 
cooperation in missiles and electronics/communications. 

An invitation from FMV has been extended to the Commanding General (CG) and the Principal Deputy for 
Technology to visit Sweden in August 1995. OICP is monitoring this visit and is expecting correspondence from 
FMV with more details. The FMV CG is scheduled to visit with HQDA this spring to finalize the Senior National 
Representative-Army (SNR-A) and pay a visit to AMC in preparation for CG's trip in August 1995. 

International Cooperative R&D Agreements 

OICP reviewed and staffed approximately 15 International Agreements. Four Agreements were negotiated 
directly. The following four Agreements were signed: 

U.SAJnited Kingdom Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Concerning Covert Night/Day 
Operations in Rotorcraft - January 1994. This program will apply electroluminescent and liquid crystal 
display technologies to the development of the next generation Helmet Mounted Displays for military and 
commercial applications. 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

Extension to the U.SAJK MOU Concerning the Principles Governing Mutual Cooperation in the 
Development of Operational Concepts for Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) - July 1994. This program 
is designed to improve and strengthen military capability in DEW through harmonization of operational concepts. 

U.S Alnited Kingdom MOU Concerning Scientist and Engineer Exchange - August 1994. This MOU 
provides for the exchange of personnel between each participants research and development facilities for a 
mutually agreed upon period of time. 

U.S7Germany Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Helicopter Aeromechanics - September 
1994. The program provides the basis for a cooperative effort to improve aeromechanics technology by 
developing analytical methods, improving experimental capabilities and generating experimental data bases in 
the disciplines of handling qualities, aerodynamics, and structures. 

The Office for International Cooperative Programs participated in several meetings of the OSD/tri-service 
International Agreement Working Group. This group continued its work in updating and improving the 
International Agreement (IA) Generator. (The IA Generator software is designed to aid DOD personnel in 
drafting bilateral IAs that conform to current OSD and Military Deputy (MILDEP) policy guidance by providing 
"boilerplate" text provisions, associated development and negotiation guidance, and key IA policy references.) 
The Group initiated work on a multilateral version and a version to use in preparing agreements with the United 
Kingdom and Canada. (Agreements with the United Kingdom and Canada are written in Memorandum of 
Understanding format using "treaty" language while Agreements with other countries are written in Agreement 
format utilizing treaty language.) The office also continued work on developing and updating a computer-based 
International Agreement Tracking and Recording System. 

U.SyCanada Defense Development Sharing Program (DDSP). Working Groups at ATCOM, CECOM, 
MICOM, and TACOM continued to work with their Canadian counterparts to identify new projects. The 
HOKUM-X Target project contract, sponsored by MICOM, was signed in July 1994. The Crewman's Associate 
Support Program through Enhanced Reconfigurability and Simulation (CASPER) project, sponsored by 
TACOM, was withdrawn due to a lack of Canadian support for the project. The program has four active projects, 
one at ATCOM and MICOM and two at TACOM. 

International Acquisition Education Advisory Group Meeting Participation and Supp ort 

The Defense Systems Management College (DSMC) recommended discontinuing all international courses 
beginning in FY95 due to the 18 percent reduction in civilian manpower over the next five years and their 
non-mandatory status. DSMC was the sole source for this type of training. The U.S. Army and parts of OSD had 
been trying to have them recognized as mandatory for certain critical portions of the Army Acquisition Corps 
(AAC) to avoid this very problem. The need for this training in leveraging U.S. funding internationally was 
increasing at a time when overall acquisition funding was decreasing making it even more important that a source 
remain for such training. Over 50 percent of the PMs listed international as an important part of their program 
yet the PM course had less than 5 hours — of over 550 total — devoted to it leaving a number of critical areas 
underexposed. The Army Materiel Command addressed this issue in many forums to ensure due consideration 
during the ongoing review and planning for educational support in FY95 and beyond. Unless this training is 
enhanced as recommended, the acquisition community will not be able to prepare for the increasing emphasis on 
international armaments cooperation or even maintain the current inadequate level of expertise. OSD, Service 
and AMC representatives from the Office for International Cooperative Programs discussed the DSMC proposal 


Materiel Acquisition AMCICP 

to eliminate international courses in FY95 to meet budget reductions. The consensus solution was preparation 
of an OSD memo from either Dr. Deutsch or Ms. Preston through the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) 
directing DSMC to retain current international courses as mandatory for designated AAC careerists and include 
a minimum of one day of instruction in the revised PM course. DSMC should revise the Multinational Program 
Management Course to a "how to" format. It would be a basic mandatory course for those going to a program 
with clear international requirements. 

Dr. Smith met with the Director, Army Acquisition Executive Support Activity (AAESA) and members of 
the AMC Acquisition Corps Office to discuss making International courses mandatory for the PM career path. 
This was necessary since DSMC budget would only permit funding of mandatory courses. Dir/ AAESA agreed 
to keep us advised and ensure our concerns are considered in his role as Army representative. He was not 
optimistic about achieving mandatory designation for them all in the PM career. He recommended exploring 
contract support in addition to DSMC and continuing to push at the Army Acquisition Corps Proponency 
Office/OSD level. Designation by position was also discussed as a more likely alternative to be considered. 

The Office of the Secretary of Defense, Service and AMC representatives reviewed FY95 DSMC 
international offerings which have essentially doubled over last Fiscal Year. The new DAU catalog would list 
them as "Assignment Specific Mandatory." They include Program Management Course (PMC) electives that 
are open on a space available basis for local personnel. A schedule will be provided to facilitate participation and 
Services should confirm their numbers requiring the various courses. DSMC will provide an estimate of time 
required to meet that need at the FY95 rate of offerings. 

A compromise category, mandatory assignment specific, between mandatory and desirable was proposed to 
allow the DSMC infrastructure for these courses to be resourced by the DAU without DAU committing to 
resourcing individual attendees expenses. These separate lower priority courses could still be endangered in 
future. AMC worked with SARD international to ensure the Army Acquisition Management Functional Board 
(AMFB) representative expressed our concerns to include formal designation of an International Acquisition 
Education (IAE) advisory subgroup to assist the AMFB. The other services and OSD did the same. Ms. Preston 
has supported IAE training to AMFB and it was considered in the DSMC PMC curricula revision. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 



Organization and Key Personnel 

The Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics FY94 dcslog Personnel 

,^n. ^> L . , ,~ ••• ■ ,~*. • ••• DCSLOG MG Frank F. Henderson 

(DCSLOG) TDA has 12 military and 125 civilian adcslog Mr. James b. Emahiser 

positions. Its Staff consists of the Deputy Chief of Executive Officer CPT Carol St. John 

Staff for T rustics 3 Directors 12 Associate Director of Maintenance Management COL Patrick Button 

Stan tor LOglSllCS, J Uireciors, 1Z ASSOCiate Director of Materiel Management Mr. James Reynolds (Act) 

Directors and the Administrative Office. 1 Director of Readiness COL Stephen Snow 

During the third quarter of FY94, the DCSLOG abolished the Office of the Director of Materiel 
Management, Associate Director for Item Introduction and Materiel Support. The Associate Director for Asset 
Management and the Associate Director for Requirements absorbed its functions. 

Several key personnel changes occurred within the DCSLOG during FY94. The Director of Maintenance 
Management, COL David Jones, retired on 30 June 1994 and COL Patrick Button replaced him on 30 August 
1 994. COL John Sims, the Director of Materiel Management, transferred to the Military Traffic Management 
Command on 9 September 1994, with Mr. James Reynolds being temporarily filling the position. COL Stephen 
Snow, the Director of Readiness, retired on 30 September 1994. 

Accountability and Management of Army War Reserves (AWR) 

In May 1992, the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) directed a new Army strategy for Army War Reserves 
(AWR) and Operational Projects Stocks (less POMCUS [Prepositioning of Materiel Configured to Unit Sets]). 
This Global Prepositioning Strategy/Force Projection Logistics unlinked individual CINCs from war reserve 
materiel and directed AMC to assume management and accountability of all AWR stocks (less Class VIII). 

AWR consists of three sub-programs: Army War Reserve Sustainment (AWRS), Army War Reserve 
Operational Projects (AWROP), and Army War Reserve Prepositioned Sets (AWRPS). The strategic focus of 
AWR is AWR-1 (CONUS), AWR-2 (Europe), AWR-3 (Afloat), AWR-4 (Far East), and AWR-5 (SWA). In 
May 1994, CSA directed AMC to assume management and accountability of POMCUS by 1 October 1995, and 
AWR-5 by mid FY96. 

AMC assumed command and control of General Support Center-Livorno, Italy (GSC-L) from USAREUR 
on 1 October 1994 and redesignated it the Leghorn Army Depot Activity (LODA). The command had assumed 
management and accountability of the AWR-2 stocks on 1 October 1993. 

AMC assumed management and accountability of AWR-2 Op Project and sustainment stocks in Central 
Region Europe on 5 December 1994. The command had deferred the accountability transfer for a year to allow 

'Unless otherwise noted, the information in this section was taken from the DCS Logistics historical 
submission for FY94. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

consolidation of stocks at Kaiserslautem, Germany and to allow for the installation of the Standard Depot System 
(SDS). DESCOM, as AMC's responsible agent for AWR, established a POMCUS/AWR-2 transition team at 
HQ, Combat Equipment Group Europe (CEGE). 

AMC called forward, but did not employ, AWR-3 ships for Operations Other than War (OOTW) in Rwanda. 
Operation Vigilant Warrior (Kuwait and Saudi Arabia) also called the ships forward and partially unloaded them. 
Afterwards, AMC reloaded the ships with stocks configured for a Task Force. 

The Department of the Army approved the plan and the TDA for the Charleston Strategic Mobility Logistics 
Base in September 1994. Recruitment was initiated for ten civilian spaces. 

AMC assumed management and accountability of AWR-4 in January 1994. The command installed SDS 
at Camp Carroll during the third quarter. 

ODCSLOG Aviation Readiness Initiatives 

The Aviation Restructure Initiative (ARI). The Chief of Staff, Army approved ARI on 3 February 1993. 
ARI represents a major milestone for Army aviation and a major force structure program for the total Army. ARI 
restructures aviation organizations at Division, Corps, and Echelon Above Corps (EAC). It also addresses long 
standing Army of Excellence (AOE) deficiencies and fields a capable, modernized, and affordable aviation force. 
The plan milestones the ARI effort for FY94 - FYOO, and will reduce rotary wing aircraft from 7,713 to 4,993. 
In FY94, ARI restructured three major units in USAREUR: the 1 1th Aviation Brigade, 12th Aviation Brigade 
and the 3rd Infantry Division. For FY95, the ARI plan projects four major FORSCOM units: the 18th Airborne 
Division, 101st Airborne Division, 24th Infantry Division, and the 10th Mountain Division. It also projects one 
USAREUR unit, the 1st Armor Division for FY95. ATCOM's Commander is responsible for ARI program 
execution, development of the ARI Logistics Support Plan, and establishment of the Materiel Redistribution 
Teams. ARI is on track with no slippage to date. 

The Aircraft Retirement Program (ARP). Running in parallel with ARI is the ARP, the Army's plan to 
retire nearly 3,000 rotary and fixed wing aircraft during FY95 - FYOO. The drivers behind these large numbers 
are force drawdowns, restructuring under ARI, fielding of modernized aircraft, and migration of missions from 
USAR and NG. ODCSLOG (DALO-AV) sponsored the ARP initiative and ATCOM is primarily responsible 
for its management, coordination, and execution. ATCOM is primarily responsible for the following actions: 

• Distribution of excess MACOM aircraft to the various authorized recipients or customers. 

• Transfer of aircraft to a central processing operation for temporary or long term storage. 

• Disposal through Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) following unit reclamation. 
Status of Resources and Training System „^I^!^ A ^^^^}EJ^r^l^ m ^ 

„r,~„r™^ ^~ ^ • ... «. .. AIRCRAFT MC%DEC93 MC%OCT94 DIFFERENCE 

(SORTS). ODCSLOG is responsible for tracking 
readiness on Army force modernized aircraft through 
the SORTS process. The AH-64 Apache, CH-47 
Chinook, OH-58 Kiowa Warrior and UH-60 
Blackhawk are 4 of the 1 6 major weapon systems tracked by the AMC ODCSLOG. ODCSLOG reports on them 









+ 1% 




+ 10% 





Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

to the Chief of Staff, Army monthly. In comparison with 1993, aircraft Mission Capable (MC) rates have 
improved significantly during 1994 for most cases 

AMC Unit Status Reporting (VSR) 

A revised version of AR 220-1 , Unit Status Reporting, became effective on 16 October 1993 for the Active 
Army, and on 16 January 1994 for the Reserve Components. From a logistics standpoint, the most significant 
change was eliminating the "Red Short" penalty. Under the previous version, the army counted unavailable 
equipment (short) as not mission capable (red). This was due to an equipment readiness computation that 
considered the mission capable equipment against required equipment. The revised computation considers the 
mission capable equipment against on hand equipment. During fiscal year 1994, AMC continued to comply with 
AR 220-1 and JCS Pub 1 .03-3, Status of Resources and Training System (SORTS). The command reported the 
status of assigned Modification Table of Organization and Equipment (MTOE) Test Measurement and 
Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE) units. 

AMC inactivated three Composite Service (CS) units in Germany on 1 October 1993. They were the 517th 
Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), the 521st CS Company, and the 523 CS Company. Only four 
TMDE MTOE units remain assigned to AMC: the 520th CS Company in Germany, the 2nd CS Company in 
Korea, the 95th CS Company and the 74th CS HHC, both at Redstone Arsenal, AL. 

The Army set up the U.S. Message Text Format (USMTF) reporting procedures, which AMC helped 
develop, as scheduled. All active Army units set it up in November 1993 and all Army National Guard and Army 
Reserve units in January 1 994. Before start-up, AMC participated in a parallel test of the Personal Computer- 
Army Status of Resources and Training System (PC-ASORTS) procedures, which use USMTF. AMC also 
helped in the development of the Program of Instruction (POI) for training PC-ASORTS USMTF procedures. 
Two Non-Commissioned Officers (NCOs) from the Redstone Arsenal's 95th CS Company participating in the 
test and training made significant contributions to both the PC-ASORTS procedures and the POI. AMC 
continued through the fiscal year to recommend improvements and enhancements to PC-ASORTS, and to validate 
program changes associated with these improvements and enhancements. 

In May 1994, HQDA began development of AR 220-XX, SORTS Basic Identity (BIDE) reporting. 
Concurrent with development of the regulation, programming began on routines for PC-ASORTS to support 
USMTF reporting of BIDE transactions upon carrying out AR 220-XX. HQDA again asked AMC to help with 
development of both the regulation and the PC-ASORTS routines. HQDA selected Redstone Arsenal as a test 
site for the PC-ASORTS routines when testing is to begin in early FY95. 

SORTS Monthly Briefing to the Chief of Staff. Army (CSA) 

During fiscal year 1 994 AMC continued to support the Army Staff in preparation and presentation of the 
monthly CSA SORTS briefing. AMC began to play an increasing role in the equipment on hand resource area. 
The command recommended redistribution for readiness at Army installations through the Requisition Validation 
Automated Redistribution System (RVARS). The primary thrust remained with the equipment serviceability 
resource area. The revised AR 220-1, Unit Status Reporting changed the Army's reporting from Equipment 
Readiness (Fully Mission Capable (FMC) against required) to Equipment Serviceability (FMC against on-hand). 
It also reduced the number of major combat units reporting below the goal for the equipment serviceability 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

resource area. Quarterly reports of the three engineer systems (M9 Armored Combat Earthmover vehicle, M728 
Combat Engineer Vehicle, and M60/M48A5 Armored Vehicle Launched Bridge) generated a CSA-level review 
of engineer equipment readiness. This review resulted in plans to implement several systems improvements and 
upgrades for these three pieces of equipment during FY95. During the fiscal year, the monthly readiness of the 
16 SORTS systems improved. It went from 12 systems consistently making the goal to 14 systems consistently 
making the goal. This was the continuation of an upward trend that has been ongoing for the past several years. 
Only the High Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT) family of vehicles and the UH-60 Blackhawk 
Helicopter remained as systems chronically below their goals. Both had brief periods during the fiscal year when 
they met their goal, an indication of an improving trend. 

Concurrent with the decrease in available funding, the Secretary of Defense, yhe Secretary of the Army, and 
their staffs began to attend the CSA SORTS briefings or request special briefings. This modified the special 
topics presented during the briefing, and changed the emphasis on the predictive ability of the Status Projection 
System (SPS) - Army Readiness Management System (ARMS). The Major Combat Units orientation continued 
as the core of the briefing. AMC also assumed responsibility for some Army War Reserve (AWR) stocks and 
now presents the quarterly special topic on AWR stocks. 

Joint Group on Logistics Readiness (JG-LR) 

In September 1993 the Joint Logistics Commanders (JLCs) formed the Joint Group on Logistics Readiness. 
The JLCs chartered the group to assess logistics from a joint service perspective, link logistics readiness to the 
Program Objective Memorandum (POM) Process, and identify potential logistics problems. The AMC Deputy 
Chief of Staff for Logistics, Major General Frank Henderson, chairs the JG-LR. The group focuses on assessing 
seven logistics categories, i.e., Weapon System Availability, Supply Availability, War Reserves, Ammunition, 
the Industrial Base, and Modernization. 

In 1994 Major General Henderson directed two major readiness assessments that were subsequently 
presented to and approved by the JLCs. He oriented the first assessment, in June 1994, on AMC's major logistics 
processes. It focused on determining if the command adequately resourced the processes and was ready to 
support the two major regional conflicts (MRC) outlined in the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG). This was 
a significant effort. It was the first time someone assessed AMC's major logistics processes from the perspective 
of joint warfighting requirements and quantified as to readiness and resource requirements. General Henderson 
focused the second assessment on the Army POM and the resource impact of the POM on AMC's major logistics 
readiness processes. This effort also produced significant results. It was the first time someone quantified the 
impact of POM funding on AMC's major logistics processes as to readiness and linked to support for the two 
major regional conflicts. This second assessment was completed in September 1994. The results of both 
assessments concluded AMC could support one major regional conflict. However, the assessments showed a risk 
associated with the second. This risk is based on critical class IX shortages for several major go-to-war weapon 

_ .. , A . i • /I-* a\ Lead MSC Assignments to the FAA 

Functional Area Analysis (FAA) MSC faa process 

ATCOM Aviation, Engineering 

The FAA process examines, by functional area, T^2£L o^ 3 "", infantry. Armor 

r J AMCCOM Personnel Support Services, Military Police, Field Artillery, 

the impact of restructuring the Army through the Special Operations Forces 

Program Objective Memorandum (POM) years. The M,C0M Medical, Air Defense Artillery 

, . , , , CBDCOM Chemical 

goal is to ensure that as the Army evolves into a CEC0M signal. Military intelligence 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

smaller force, each functional area has a well coordinated, cost-effective transition plan. When AMC started the 
FAAs in the early 1980s, it assigned them to its Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs). Initial assignments to 
the MSCs were based on the command with the highest level of participation. Subsequently, AMC has 
established a "Lead" MSC concept offering a single AMC voice and face to the FAA process. 

In FY94, four FAAs were presented to the VCSA. These included Medical, Military Intelligence, Military 
Police, and Special Operations Forces. Through FY94 the AMC DCSLOG coordinated the total major command 
effort supporting the FAA process. The key effort was to prepare a command strategy for resolving AMC issues 
and assessing materiel issues against their potential for adversely affecting force readiness. 

AMC Aviation Office 

The AMC Aviation Office conducted the annual AMC Aviation Training Symposium at Fort Worth, Texas 
during January 1994. Commanders, standardization and training, aviation safety, aircraft maintenance, and 
contractor personnel representing all AMC Aviation Activities attended the event. The AMC Aviation 
Standardization Committee Meeting followed the Symposium. Mr. George J. Tomei retired on 1 February 1994. 
He provided 17 years of dedicated service as the AMC Aviation Standardization Officer. In August, Mr. Charles 
Hogg replaced him. 

AMC Aviation Fleet management has allowed for the retirement of 14 aircraft, 1 1 UH-1H, 2 OH-58C, and 
1 AH- IS. AMC requested, and received, authority to dismantle and retire the aircraft in place. The command 
salvaged/retained more than $3M of serviceable parts for the remaining AMC fleet. The retirements/reductions 
of AMC aircraft exceed requirements established by DA DCSOPS. They are consistent with the downsizing of 
AMC and the recommendations of the AMC Management Engineering Activity (MEA) independent study of 
AMC Aviation. 

AMC obtained a C-12D Cargo/Utility airplane for the Chemical, Biological Defense Command (CBDCOM). 
This will enhance the efficiency, effectiveness, and safety of the Army Chemical Surety Program. The command 
is currently refurbishing the C-12D and the anticipated delivery date is February 1995. 

The Aviation Office conducted Aviation Resource Management Surveys (ARMS) at ten AMC Aviation 
Activities, during the Fiscal Year. These surveys included evaluation of AMC owned airfields, aviation units and 
Army flying clubs. All evaluations were satisfactory. 

The AMC Aviation Office has been designated as the functional proponent of AR 95-20, "Contractor's 
Ground and Flight Operations," by HQDA (DALO-AV). AR 95-20 is a DLA/Tri-service regulation. It applies 
to all aviation contracts in which the U.S. Army assumes risk of loss of an aircraft during the manufacture, 
modification, maintenance or operation by a contractor. The Aviation Staff strongly influenced the recent rewrite 
of the Tri-Service regulation. 

Preparation of Sustainment Requirements for Various OPLANs and Contingencies 

From September 1993 to December 1993, AMC generated sustainment requirements for OPLAN (Operation 
Plan) 41 22 and sourced them with AMC's Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs). Non-unit cargo records were 
prepared and forwarded to the responsible Commander-In-Charge (CINC) for inclusion in the OPLAN. In 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

February 1994, HQ AMC participated in a U.S. Army Transportation Command (TRANSCOM)/CINC 
transportation feasibility conference on OPLAN 4122. 

In December 1993, increased tension in North East Asia made AMC review the sustainment requirements 
for the existing OPLAN that covers this area. The command computed requirements, sourced them, and reviewed 
the results. This effort enabled the review of the processes and systems used in generating and sourcing 
requirements. It also allowed existing systems to be improved and/or replaced by portions of a new system, the 
Army WWMCCS Information System (A WIS) Logistics Product Line that was still under development 

The General Headquarters Exercise - FY94 (GHQ-94) provided HQ AMC and the MSCs the additional 
opportunity to generate sustainment requirements for two simultaneous Major Regional Contingencies (MRCs). 
AMC discovered that the existing systems/procedures for generating and sourcing requirements for two 
simultaneous MRCs were not readily in place. However, the MSCs did work out a way to supply these 
requirements. Preliminary results appear to suggest that the Army can support two simultaneous MRCs at risk. 

On 8 September 1994, HQ AMC held the first of three planned meetings on the Logistics Planning Process. 
These meetings will look at the functionality of the different classes of supply. In particular, who is responsible 
for requirement determination and sourcing, and assessment of these requirements and what the commands 
supplied. The first meeting was on Class V. The remaining two meetings (Classes I-IV, and Classes VII, IX) 
will take place in March 1995. 

During FY94 operations, HQ AMC, the Logistics Support Activity (LOGSA), and the U.S. Army Materiel 
Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA) prepared Class DC Customer Support Requirements Lists (CSRLs) for 
specified group(s) of equipment. They generated these recommended requirements in a matter of days (using 
AWIS Logistics and the Optimum Stockage Requirements Analysis Program (OSRAP)), and then forwarded 
them to units. One of these CSRLs was forwarded to U.S. Forces Command (FORSCOM) for the Haiti relief 
effort at Guantanamo Bay, and they used it in the relief effort. 

Throughout FY94, HQ AMC, with LOGSA and AMSAA, refined the Class DC requirements calculation 
process using AWIS Logistics and OSRAP. They expect to refine this process further when they include OSRAP 
in a future version of AWIS Logistics. 

Additionally in FY94, HQ AMC assessed the ongoing development of AWIS Logistics. The command 
influenced the priority of development through Project Manager (PM) AWIS for the final portions of the current 
development contract. 


Somalia. Through the spring of 1994, the Army maintained a 10 to 15-person logistics assistance presence. 
The remaining personnel were withdrawn in March 1994. Security assistance channels handled the fielding of 
M60 tanks and other equipment to U.N. forces. 

Macedonia. Through 1994, the Army maintained a presence in Macedonia. One or two Logistics 
Assistance Representatives supported the small U.S. peacekeeping force. AMC Logistics Support Element - 
Europe continued to update operational plans for a division size peacekeeping force for Bosnia. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

Rwanda. In July 1994, civil war in Rwanda caused a massive flow of refugees. The worst conditions were 
in Goma, Zaire. The U.S. and other nations provided humanitarian assistance called Operation Support Hope. 
On 1 8 July 1994, the AMC Logistics Support Element-Europe was alerted to coordinate plans with the task force. 
AMC appointed BG Gerald as the Commander of Logistics Support Element-Europe and he deployed to Europe 
with key personnel. The main mission was to prepare to hand-off humanitarian materiel from the prepositioned 
ships, including water purification and distribution systems. A logistics assistance representative to support the 
reverse osmosis water purifiers was the first person to deploy in Goma, Zaire. While Logistics Support 
Element-Europe was coordinating and planning, the hand-off team was battle rostered. A total of 1 22 personnel 
was alerted and the first increment moved through Aberdeen Proving Ground for issue of clothing and individual 
equipment. They then moved to Fort Eustis and awaited call forward with Military Traffic Management 
Command (MTMC) and 7th Transportation Group. At maximum, in early August 1994, the LSE had 26 people 
deployed, one in Goma and 25 in Mombasa, Kenya, including seven contractors. The main accomplishment was 
the idea for a Joint Logistics Support Command with MTMC, Military Sealift Command and 7th Transportation 
Group. DSCLOG also validated that more than 90 percent of the equipment on the ships is fully mission capable 
and transitioned vehicles for the World Food Organization. The main lesson learned was the need for contingency 
contracts. Although AMC did not hand-off the Army War Reserve stocks or operate a humanitarian depot, it did 
display the force projection characteristics of anticipation, responsiveness and agility. AMC also received 
support from the Chief of Staff of the Army. 

Battle Rostering. Originally, DCSLOG planned to identify only key personnel in the command group plus 
an initial operational capability. Volunteers could fill other positions in the Logistics Support Element. AMC 
decided that true force projection with a Logistics Support Element required all the positions to be battle rostered 
and designated key positions as Emergency Essential. The incumbents of those positions were issued clothing 
and individual equipment so that they can deploy on short notice. The Logistics Support Activity has the lead 
for the battle rostering project. However, reorganizations and downsizing have slowed progress. 

Haiti. In September 1994, Joint Task Force 190 deployed to Haiti to restore the democratic government. 
The Logistics Support Element supported Army forces in its traditional role. In addition, AMC provided 
personnel for the Command and Control of the Joint Logistics Support Command (JLSC), relieving the 1 st Corps 
Support Command. The follow-on mission is to transition logistics support to the United Nations Mission in 
Haiti. A working group with representatives from the General Services Administration, Defense Logistics 
Agency (DLA), 1 st Corps Support Command, Military Traffic Management Command, 7th Transportation 
Group, Combined Arms Support Command and Army Materiel Command developed the JLSC plan. The 
General Staff of the Logistics Support Element and a mix of military units and contractors became the Joint Staff 
of the Joint Logistics Support Command. After the transition, BG Sullivan, from the Aviation-Troop Support 
Command (ATCOM), commanded the Joint Logistics Support Command, COL Drugley, from Logistics Support 
Element-CONUS, commanded the Logistics Support Element, and 96 personnel were on the ground. 

Other Operations. In the summer of 1994, a tropical storm dropped record amounts of rain on Georgia and 
Florida. AMC deployed up to five people to support forces engaged in flood relief. The lead was LTC Curtis, 
LAO Fort Benning. The main mission was to support water purification. In July- August 1994, AMC deployed 
nine personnel to Kuwait for an exercise. The command deployed small groups to the Caribbean. Several people 
deployed to the Dominican Republic when AMC fielded helicopters and other equipment to enforce the embargo 
against Haiti. Several others deployed to Guantanamo (GTMO) to provide logistics assistance for Haitian/Cuban 
migrant operations. The lead was LTC Powell, LAO Fort Hood. LAO-Panama provided support to the new 


Materiel Readiness 


migrant camp in Suriname. In August 1994, AMC also provided support to forces fighting wildfires in the 
western states. The lead was LTC Allen, LAO Fort Lewis. 

Total Package Fielding (TPF) 

For FY94, AMC expended $18.4M PA funding 
for TPF of AMC/PM systems. A total of $153.8M 
was spent for TPF of PEO/PM systems as well. 
These dollar values represented 6552 system 
fieldings. The bulk dollar value items were the 
UH-60 Aircraft, Multiple Launch Rocket System 
(MLRS), Avenger, Patriot, Abrams, Bradley, Single 
Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System 
(SINCGARS), AN/VDR-2, Chemical Agent Monitor 
(CAM) and 9mm Pistol. 

Defense Depot Maintenance 
Business Plan (BP) 

Council (DDMC) 



Dollar Value 










CAM, Paladin, 9mm Pistol, Weld 
Shop, MK 19 Machine Gun 





Blackhawk, KIOWA Warrior, 
Tactical Quiet Generator 





AN/VDR-2, AN/PDR-75 




41. OM 

MLRS, Stinger, Avenger, IFTE, 
Patriot, Hawk 





HMMWV, PLS, Abrams, M9 
Ace, Asphalt Mix Pit, M 1073 Trlr, 
CBT Support 





Note: Extreme increase in the total number of fieldings from the 
previous fiscal year, due to the many fieldings of SINCGARS Radios. 

The Defense Depot Maintenance Council Business Plan (DDMC BP) describes the continuing joint Service 
initiatives for managing the organic depot maintenance industrial base during the 1990's and beyond. The 
impetus for the DDMC BP was twofold. First, the DDMC BP was to provide an overview of depot maintenance 
operations management. Second, the document was to bridge the era of Defense Management Report Decision 
(DMRD) 908 and the DDMC Corporate Business Plan (CBP) and the present period. 

The two editions of the DDMC CBP were "report cards" on achievement of Defense Management Report 
Decision (DMRD) 908 savings targets. The OSD Comptroller ended the requirement to report savings data for 
DMRD 908 actions on 2 August 1993. However, the Comptroller directed the Services to continue carrying out 
planned management actions and to submit annual progress reports. 

The era of DMRD 908 and the CBP was one of business planning, during which depot maintenance 
management reoriented toward the practices of commercial industry. Business planning emphasized increasing 
depot efficiency to reduce costs and make depots competitive with the private sector. Public -private competition 
became an important method for selecting depot sources of repair. Recently issued policies continue to stress 
the need for improved depot efficiency, but have also ended competition between the commercial and organic 
sectors for now. What previously determined the size of the organic industrial base was, in part, its ability to 
compete with the commercial sector. However, current policy calls for reducing the organic infrastructure to the 
depot maintenance core. The depot maintenance community is moving from a competitive relationship with 
private industry to a partnership. 

This report describes the evolution of policy on depot maintenance management. This entails recapping 
recently conducted analyses and new OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense] policies emanating from those 
studies. The basis for depot maintenance planning has solidified since the publication of the last CBP. 
Completion of the Bottom-Up Review in September 1993 established a planning baseline for the proper size of 
organic depot operations. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

The DDMC BP presents statistical information on various aspects of depot maintenance, including budget, 
workload, capacity, and personnel. These reflect the continued downsizing of the depot maintenance 
infrastructure. Recommendations of the 1995 Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) will influence 
all projections. 

A third type of information presented is the status of many management actions. These include 
closures/realignments mandated by BRAC for 1 1 depot maintenance installations, and the many initiatives 
resulting from Defense Management Report Decision 908, "Consolidating Depot Maintenance." This document 
reviews the progress to date in carrying out prior DDMC CBP actions and notes the changes in strategy 
demanded by changing conditions. Twenty-four actions relating to capacity/consolidation initiatives have been 
completed, with five more actions continuing. Between FY91 and the conclusion of public-private competition 
in May 1994, all Services were participating in competition. During this period, 145 public private competitions 
were completed with award values of nearly $1 .5 billion. Also, 13 inter-servicing actions have been completed 
that were a direct result of DDMC CBP or BRAC related initiatives. The level of inter-servicing for the most 
current year available (FY 92), is 7.6 percent. This reflects an increase of 0.6 percent from FY91 . 

Finally, this report describes strategies and plans for future depot maintenance management. This is an era 
of substantial change for the depot maintenance community. Recent BRAC decisions have initiated significant 
reductions in depot maintenance infrastructure, and BRAC-95 promises to intensify this trend. OSD has issued 
several new policies of a pivotal nature. More new policies may yet be forthcoming. The command must view 
the strategies and plans reflected in this document as transitory, since they are still evolving. Inevitably, BRAC-95 
will influence them. Future editions of this report will reflect the progress the Services make in carrying out the 
various decisions and strategies within the DOD depot maintenance community. 

Depot Maintenance 

Depot Maintenance is an integral part of the total FY94 Obligations for P7M Major items ($ in millions) 

Army logistics system. Besides new procurement, it 
is the primary source of equipment supply for the 
Army. The program overhauls and repairs major end 
items, for instance. It also oversees the maintenance 
of embedded software for weapon systems. Finally, it 
calibrates Test, Measurement and Diagnostic 
Equipment to sustain approved weapon system 
requirements. This ensures the operational readiness 
of the Army. 


TOTAL 249 445 694 

The Army held reviews of the HQ AMC/DA 
depot materiel maintenance requirements in July. The purpose of the reviews was to validate total depot materiel 
maintenance requirements and develop the best contract and organic (in-house) mix of depot maintenance. 
ODCSLOG received the Depot Maintenance OP-29 for the AMC FY96/7 budget estimate submission in June 







FY94 Overhaul and Repair of 


Items Obligations 

($ million) 

Command Contract 

























Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

Depot Maintenance Program Review 

Quarterly depot maintenance reviews, chaired by HQ AMC, were initiated in 1986 to monitor depot 
maintenance programs and held until recently. These reviews were similar to Functional Area Assessments 
(FAAs). The purpose was to improve requirement determination and monitor production achievement against 
the plan to meet the requirement. Items were selected because of high dollar value or readiness factors. 
Consistent with the CG's commitment to power down, DCSLOG has elected to eliminate these labor intensive 
HQ AMC chaired reviews. 

In May, representatives from HQ AMC, DESCOM, AMCCOM, ATCOM, CECOM, MICOM, and TACOM 
participated in a video conference review. Topics discussed included funding breakout, obligation plans, critical 
unfunded requirements, and forecast of unliquidated obligations reductions. They have tentatively scheduled the 
next video conference reviews for November 1994 and May 1995. 

Core Depot Maintenance 

AMC has defined, following the Office of the Secretary of Defense's guidance, the amount and type of core 
depot maintenance. Core depot maintenance is the work government depots must do to be prepared to support 
the two major regional contingency (2-MRC) scenario of the Defense Planning Guidance. With the assistance 
of the Army Materiel Systems Analysis Agency, Depot Systems Command, Concepts Analysis Agency, and the 
AMC Major Subordinate Commands, AMC did the core calculations. The command then briefed the Deputy 
Under Secretary of Defense (Logistics), who approved them. The core figures are now the basis for 
recommendations concerning what depot capacity the Base Realignment and Closure Commission could take 
from AMC. Because the command has based the core calculations on the Defense Planning Guidance, AMC can 
safely downsize without losing the ability to support the 2-MRC scenario. 

Project STIR (Special Technical Inspection and Repair) 

STIR inspected, repaired, and modified force modernization aircraft deployed in support of Operations Desert 
Shield/Storm. It returned these aircraft to Pre-Desert Storm condition. P2 dollars funded this program. The total 
cost was $439M. Nine hundred eleven aircraft went through the STIR program with the last aircraft handed off 
on 1 August 1994. 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 95 Input 

BRAC 95 is the last round of closures allowed by Public Law. The Deputy Secretary of Defense set the DOD 
goal for BRAC 95 to reduce overall domestic base structure by at least 15 percent of plant replacement value. 
The Deputy Secretary of Defense also directed that BRAC 95 give more emphasis than past BRACs to 
cross-service tradeoffs and multi-service use of common support assets. As a result, BRAC undertook two 
separate groups of analyses: DOD Component installation analyses (in which each service examined its own 
installations to identify candidates for realignment or closure), and Joint Cross-Service analyses of selected areas 
with significant potential for cross-service impacts. 

The DCS provided information for both the component analysis (the Army Installation Analysis) and a joint 
analysis (the Joint Cross Service Group for Depot Maintenance). Information pertained to the five Army 
maintenance depots remaining after BRAC I (1988), BRAC 91 (1991), and BRAC 93 (1993). Information 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

included programmed workloads by commodity, capacities, unique capabilities, floor space, personnel onboard 
and planned, geographic location, and environmental impacts. HQ Depot System Command (DESCOM), HQ 
Industrial Operations Command (IOC) (Provisional), or the individual depots developed most of the data in 
response to HQ AMC DCSLOG data calls. HQ AMC DCSLOG then reviewed and consolidated the information 
for HQDA. 

HQ AMC DCSLOG responded to the Army Installation Assessment data call on 26 May 1994. It responded 
to the Joint Cross Service Group for Depot Maintenance data call on 8 July 1994. Several subsequent updates 
followed each response. 

Depot Maintenance Competition 

FY94 legislation allowed continuation of the Depot Maintenance Competition Program with the restriction 
that government employees do 60 percent of the depot workload. The Army competed one program valued at 
$7.2M before a budget check showed that it was at the 60 percent limit. DOD ended the competition program 
for all Services because differences in accounting systems caused an uneven playing field. 

FY95 legislation allows continuing competition but the 60 percent limit remains. In addition, public bidders 
may have to have their accounting systems certified by the Defense Finance Accounting Service. Workloads 
costing more than $3 million must compete if moved from a depot to either another depot or private industry. 
However, they can use inter-servicing procedures instead of competition. FY95 competition may depend on how 
the 1 04th Congress reacts to future DOD reports on recommended depot maintenance procedures. The good 
news is that AMC saved an estimated $60M from the FY91-94 competitions. 

Depot Maintenance Resource Predictive Model 

The Depot Maintenance Resource Predictive Model (DMRPM) was a DA model initiated in 1989. The Joint 
Logistics System Center (JLSC) funded the DA Program Management System Development Agency (PMSDA) 
to consider DMRPM as a potential depot maintenance program requirement application for the Services. 
PMSDA visited the AMC Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs) to document and model the depot maintenance 
program requirements development processes. With the disestablishment of PMSDA, DA transferred the 
DRMPM to the JLSC. 

Depot Maintenance - 60/40 Organic/Contract Report 

The National Defense Authorization Act for FY94 required that only 60 percent of the depot-level 
maintenance funds available each fiscal year will be for employees of the Department of Defense. The language 
in FY93 allowed 55 percent in FY94 and 60 percent in FY95. These calculations are based on the total dollars 
obligated for depot-level maintenance of both Major Items ( 1 1 8207) and Depot Level Reparables (DLRs) (stock 

For FY94, $1 266.1 M were obligated for depot-level maintenance-$694.1 M for Major Items and $572M 
for DLRs. These figures include dollars for Fixed Wing Contractor Logistic Support. AMC met the 
Congressional language requirement in FY94. The organic/contract split was 60 percent organic ($764.4M) and 
40 percent contract ($501 .7). AMC also met the Aviation requirement in FY94 with 57 percent organic and 43 
percent contract. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

Policy on Manufacturing by Army Facilities 

HQ AMC has developed guidance on when Army facilities may manufacture equipment instead of buying 
it. This guidance is based on DA policy and it has been coordinated with the DA DCSLOG staff and the Major 
Subordinate Commands. DCSLOG expects formal concurrence from DA in December 1994 with immediate 
distribution to follow. 

Enhanced Specialized Repair Activity (SRA) Request Procedures 

HQDA has delegated approval authority for SRA requests to the Major Subordinate Commands (General 
Officer/SES level). This change has speeded up all unit requests and has significantly reduced the backlog and 
improved the responsiveness to field Army units. 

Recommendations for disapproval based upon skill levels, required test equipment or impact on the AMC 
depot workload are forwarded to USALEA for evaluation. They make recommendations to HQDA for final 
resolution. The present goal is to evaluate and process all SRA requests within 90 days of receipt. 

Joint Group on Logistics Readiness (JG-LR) Depot Maintenance Backlog Assessment 

JG-LR is to provide an integrated, joint service capability to report significant logistics readiness issues and 
trends to the Joint Logistics Commanders (JLCs). This capability will strengthen the position of the JLCs to 
analyze logistics readiness across a broad spectrum over time and provide early warning of potential force 
hollowness. Logistics readiness assessments are focusing on seven logistics categories, of which depot 
maintenance backlog is one. The objective is to relate logistics readiness assessments to warfighting capabilities, 
regeneration, reconstitution, and resource requirements. 

New Equipment Training (NET) 

AMC played a major role in conducting NET for Training Conducted at MSC/SRA Net Locations 
u.ud • \\* mxA AT , % AMCCOM 1,598 

both Project Manager (PM) and Program Executive atcom 2,777 

Officer (PEO) managed programs in FY94. The cecom n\m 

command taught a total of 2,407 classes with a total jacom 3 156 

of 62,474 students trained. AMC was the host of an tmde 244 

Army-wide special Training Support Work Group £n«c£ ^o? 

ERDEC \yj 

Conference held in St. Louis, MO on 20-21 vhfs 642 

September 1994. The agenda focused primarily on 

identifying training alternatives in response to TRADOC's proposal to reduce work force support for NET teams. 

M48/M60 Tank Demilitarization 

Because of a successful Pilot program to cut up 1 25 tanks, a scrap metal firm in Bedford, IN, received a 
contract to demilitarize 1,000 excess/obsolete M48/M60 combat tanks. These tanks have been in long-term 
storage. AMC is demilitarizing them to clean up Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) and to avoid paying the FY96 
storage cost of approximately 46 cents per square foot. As of the end of September, the command shipped the 
tanks to the contractor site in Bedford, IN. The contractor cut up and melted the vehicles for other uses. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

DCSLOG is now studying similar programs to scrap approximately 350 M551 Sheridan vehicles that are excess 
and in condition code H at ANAD. 

Depot Profile Initiative 

Since 1988, AMC has reduced the number of maintenance depots from ten to five and anticipates downsizing 
the depot maintenance infrastructure further. The DCSLOG Associate Director for Maintenance Production 
prepared profiles on five remaining depots to help such downsizing and to help prepare the CG for his annual 
Congressional Testimony. These profiles included the following: the current and planned capacity and workload, 
facilities size, personnel strengths, estimates of ongoing missions if maintenance activities closed, unique 
capabilities, Congressional representation, and statistics on the surrounding communities. AMCLG provided 
the profiles to AMC staff offices as necessary. 

Intelligence Electronic Warfare Sustainment Streamlining Study (IEWSS) 

In May 1994, the IEWSS Implementation Pilot Program conducted at Fort Hood (initiated on 15 July 1993) 
was completed. The initial use of the IEWSS idea was a pilot program conducted at the General Support level, 
Fort Hood. It was the first application of the Regional Support Center (RSC) idea. The goal of the RSC pilot 
program was to integrate the 1 59th GS Maintenance Detachment and the Interim Support contractor into a single 
RSC. The pilot program initiated the exchange of maintenance information between the soldier and civilian 
technicians. Data collection for quarterly unit reviews continues. 

Currently endeavors are underway in Augsbury, Germany to complete the installation of an RSC. 
Streamlining efforts are also ongoing in Korea, Panama and Fort Gordon, GA. At the present, Fort Bragg, NC, 
and Fort Lewis, WA, are on hold. 

On 1 4 July 1 994, the CECOM Intelligence Materiel Management Center (CIMMC) office updated the 
HQDA, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence (DCSINT) and DCSLOG on the IEWSS program. 
CIMMC particularly emphasized refocusing the MACOM involvement. The presentation was well received and 
cleared the way to begin preparation for full use of the IEWSS concept. 

In August 1994, a DA DCSINT message stated that DA DCSINT, DCSLOG, and DCSOPS fully support 
the IEWSS concept and its use within the Army. The message emphasized that the support is not limited to the 
establishment of RSCs, but also to those areas approved by the GOSC in October 1992 that support the RSCs; 
i.e., contract consolidation and the financial process work group, AMC command and control, and fully 
documenting the process within Army doctrine and regulations. 

CIMMC personnel have been working with DA DCSINT to establish an intelligence architecture on the Force 
Integration Master Planner (FIM). The objective of this effort is to portray the entire IEW battlefield, from 
ground-based tactical systems up to National Level intelligence gathering platforms. Arrayed between are the 
communications nets, data links, and the processors that accumulate, analyze and distribute the data. CIMMC 
personnel have been working to establish a process to tie the sustainment requirement to the operational 
requirement in this architecture. 

On 28 September 1 994, DA DCSLOG issued an HQDA message providing guidance for maintenance of 
Army tactical IEW materiel. The message acknowledged the CG AMC responsible for supporting the Army IEW 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

materiel. CIMMC is the Army executive agent for tactical IEW logistics sustainment. CIMMC has single point 
responsibility within the Army for IEW logistics sustainment. As part of this responsibility, all sustainment 
contracts will be consolidated under the control of CIMMC. The RSC is an integrated repair activity that gives 
the field a dedicated support structure for low density IEW systems. The RSC will centralize IEW maintenance 
management and maximize integration of the soldier and contractor/civilian regional support. The RSC will 
provide maintenance support for items that IEW units cannot repair. It is a tailored activity, based on the units 
and equipment supported in the regional area. The guidance will be incorporated into Update 15 of AR 750-1. 

Tactical Missile Consolidation 

The July 1993 BRAC Commission recommended tactical missiles be consolidated at Letterkenny Army 
Depot. The consolidation will follow the 'Tactical Missile Maintenance Consolidation Plan for Letterkenny 
Army Depot," 31 January 1992, Revised 30 April 1992 (GREEN BOOK). In July of 1993 this recommendation 
became law. In February of 1994 the Department of Justice granted a motion to vacate and dissolve the 
injunction by the Anniston Army Depot labor union to block the consolidation. 

The CG DESCOM chaired a new Joint Service Working Group in 1994 to update the missile consolidation 
plan and continue consolidation actions. The plan will be forwarded to the JPCG shortly. They have signed 
transition plans for six missile systems already. The group estimates validated nonrecurring costs (as of 30 
September 1994) at $43.232M. Expected total BRAC funding is $51.073M. MICOM required A total of 
$15.490M in BRAC funds to carry out the program. They have received these funds. They expect the planned 
transition workload for FY99 to be 759.5K working hours. 

They have developed a process to review the contract workload by National Stock Number (NSN) and 
determine what they can bring into Letterkenny economically. The Deputy Under Secretary for Defense 
(Logistics) (DUSD(L)) requires a request for waiver, with legal opinion, for GREEN BOOK systems not 
scheduled to go to Letterkenny by FY99. The Navy has already sent Harpoon and Standard to the DUSD(L) for 
consideration. The Army schedule for requesting waivers to contract workloads follows: MLRS, Patriot, Hawk, 
TOW BFVS, Hellfire, and Avenger, 30 November 1994; Stinger, 31 January 1995. 

Consolidate Pensacola NADEP H-60/AH-1 W Work Load to CCAD 

The 1 993 BRAC Closure and Realignment Commission recommended that the Pensacola Naval Aviation 
Depot H-60 and AH-1W work load transition to Corpus Christi Army Depot (CCAD). Additionally, the 
commission directed that the Pensacola dynamic components' facility and whirltower work load be directed to 
either CCAD, Cherry Point, NC, or to a contractor. 

The prototype airframes for the AH-1 W and H-60 were completed 19 September 1994. CCAD is becoming 
certified for the FY95 component work load. CCAD has Depot Maintenance Plant Equipment projects in process 
to establish full capability to repair or overhaul the H-60 roto blades, and those for the CH-47D. The transfer 
program is on target. 

AMC (DCSLOG) Biweekly Video Teleconference (VTC) 

The purpose of these VTCs is to enhance communication among the senior logistics community through open 
exchange of ideas and information. This year the format changed to focus on both logistics management and on 


Materiel Readiness 


field readiness with one VTC per month being devoted to readiness issues. Among the topics covered this year 
were; changes in the Army war reserve policy and Army Implementation of the DOD Blueprint for Change. 
These VTCs have been well received by the community and continue in 1995. 

End Item Supply Depot Supp ort 

The major item Supply Depot Support program pays for the internal operations at Defense Logistics 
Agency/DESCOM wholesale supply depots. Specifically this account funds receipt storage and issue of materiel 
for Army and non-Army customers. Specific supply functions include care of supplies in storage (COSIS), care 
of materiel in storage (COMIS), equipment inventory/inspections and set assembly/disassembly. 

In FY94, as in previous years, the major item Supply Depot Support continued to experience funding 
shortfalls. At the beginning of FY94, the program received only 58 percent of required funding. Because of other 
high-priority, unfunded requirements HQDA was unable to provide additional funds during the year to alleviate 
these fund shortfalls. AMC headquarters did provide $4M of additional funding from internal resources in June 
1994 to fund the highest priority depot issues. The MSCs also did some small amounts of internal 
reprogramming to obtain additional resources. 

In August 1994, the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense Corporate Board approved the use of 
discrete pricing for major and secondary item Supply 
Depot support in FY96. This new policy will replace 
the overall composite rate with different levels of 
receipt/issue rates per weapon system commodity. 
They will charge certain functions, including COSIS, 
above commercial level packaging and storage on an 
actual cost basis outside the rates. 

Final FY94 End Item Supply Depot Support Funding Posture 

($ in millions): 
Command Requirement Funded 






















FY94 Second Destination Transportation Funding Posture for Major Items 

($ in millions): 

Command Requirement Funded 

End Item Second Destination Transportation 

Second Destination Transportation (SDT) of 
major items is vital to maintaining Army readiness. 
This program pays for Continental United States 
(CONUS) linehaul transportation of major items 
from wholesale stocks to CONUS field units and to 
CONUS ports for shipment to overseas units. It also 
pays for CONUS linehaul redistribution of stocks 
within the depot system and returns major items from 
field units to the maintenance depots. In FY94 as in previous years the major item SDO program continued to 
experience funding shortfalls. At the beginning of FY94, the major item SDT program received only 47 percent 
of required funding. Because of other high-priority, unfunded requirements HQDA was unable to provide 
additional funds during the year to alleviate these fund shortfalls. The MSCs could do some internal 
reprogramming to meet their most important SDT requirements. 



















TOTAL 26.7 

♦Other Includes TECOM, USATA and retrograde. 



Materiel Readiness 


End Item Inventory Control Point Operations 

This account funds pay of people who run AMC 
Major Subordinate Command (AMC) supply 
management functions. This includes requirements 
determination/forecasting and preparation of baseline 
cost estimates, economic analysis, life cycle cost 
estimates, catalog estimates, contingency planning 
studies, and mobilization computations. 

FY94 Funding Posture for End Item Inventory Control Point Operations 

($ in millions): 






















Total Maintenance End Item Integrated Materiel Management 





































When a weapon system finishes its production p* 94 Ending Posture by msc ($ in millions): 

. . . •«•!•*! /• r»w Command Requirement Funded 

phase, certain system responsibilities pass from a PM 

to the acquiring MSC for recurring efforts. This 

program funds centralized programming and planning 

support, technical and engineering services, and 

preparation of maintenance publications and 

engineering data for out of production weapon 

systems. Specifically this account pays for such 

functions as the issue and revision of materiel fielding 

plans; review, research, and response to equipment 

improvement reports; incorporation of engineering changes into technical data packages; preparation, writing, 

illustrating and editing changes and revisions to publications and narrative technical manuals; and administering, 

monitoring and responding to quality deficiency reports. 

As in previous years, this program was severely under-funded in FY94 although it is one of the most 
significant programs as to its effect on Army readiness. Adequate funding in this account is critical to prevent 
neglect and system degradation. The result of inadequate funding is decreased readiness, inefficiency and 
excessive cost. In FY94, this program received 40 percent of required funding. 

A pplication of DMRD 902. Supply Depot Operations 

The Defense Management Review Decision (DMRD) 902, October 1989, mandated the transfer of supply 
operations at Service depots to the Defense Logistic Agency (DLA). A joint Army/DLA Master Memorandum 
of Agreement (MMOA), in October 1992 documented completion of the transfer. 

One key provision of the MMOA was the requirement for Interservice Support Agreements (IS As) between 
Army and DLA staff at each of the affected Army depots. They developed those ISAs by November 1993. 
However, Army/DLA differences over payment for DLA's supply support to Army's maintenance programs 
delayed the application of those ISAs at various times in the staffing process. 

At this time, it appears that the Army and DLA have resolved their differences. They will carry out the ISAs 
in late 1994, or early 1995. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

Disposal of Flight Safety Critical Aircraft Parts 

During late FY94, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the commercial aircraft industry expressed 
concerns about DOD policies and procedures for disposing of critical flight safety parts. On 13 September 1994, 
representatives from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the FAA, the Defense Logistics Agency 
(DLA) and the Services met at DLA headquarters to address this concern. 

Because of the meeting, OSD requested that the Army and FAA co-chair a Process Action Team (PAT) 
consisting of Service and DLA representatives to accomplish four tasks: 

• Define a process to identify dual-use aircraft parts (used on both military and commercial aircraft) considered 
critical to safety. 

• Make the appropriate documentation available to the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Offices (DRMOs) 
at the time of disposal. 

• Develop a coding structure and process that ensures the mutilation of flight safety critical parts lacking 
appropriate documentation. 

• Develop a plan to accomplish the above. 

The Process Action Team will submit a Plan of Action and Milestones (POAM) to OSD for approval in early 
FY95. Next year's Annual Command History will summarize the status of the POAM application. 

Automatic Identification Technology (AIT) 

AMC's role in AIT, including Logistics Applications of Automated Marking and Reading Technology 
(LOGMARS) and Microcircuit Technology in Logistics Applications (MITLA), has diminished over the past 
year. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Logistics)'s 27 February 1992 Defense Management 
Review Decision (DMRD) 902 "Supply Depot Consolidation" transferred AIT applications related to wholesale 
distribution functions to DLA on 30 July 1993. In the summer of 1994, the U.S. Army Depost Systems 
Command (DESCOM) and the Systems Integration and Management Activity (SIMA), with technical support 
from the Logistics Support Activity (AMCLOGS A) Packaging, Storage, and Containerization Center (PSCC), 
installed the Standard Depot System LOGMARS applications at Camp Carole, Korea and Camp Darby, Italy 
in support of AMC's new Mission to manage Army War Reserves. At the same they also helped in installing 
these applications at the Equipment Redistribution Facility (ERF) in Nahbollenbach, Germany. ERF is still 
awaiting delivery of the LOGMARS printers needed for LOGMARS Shipping so the DCS is not finished there. 
The rest of AMC's efforts have been in technical support: 

Radio Frequency (RF) MITLA Devices. In November 1993, the Combined Arms Support Command 
(CASCOM) used an AMC idea for RF MITLA devices in their plan for improving the Army's Combat Service 
Support (CSS) systems. AMCLOGSA PSCC, the Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM), and the 
Project Manager Ammunition Logistics (PM AMMOLOG) began the effort in March 1993. CECOM completed 
the proposed operational requirements/capabilities idea in June 1993 and endorsed to CASCOM. The family 
consists of seven RF tags, i.e., three basic devices plus four combinations, and one interrogator that can talk with 
the entire family. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

Army AIT Contract After a 3-year effort, the INTERMEC Corporation received the Army AIT contract 
on 25 March 1994. The contract went into effect on 7 June 1994 after the courts rejected protests from other 
bidders. The contract covers bar code hardware, laser cards, contact MITLA devices, and associated Radio 
Frequency Identification (RFDD) communications devices. AMCLOGSA PSCC acted as Army's technical 
representative for the contract. 

Air Force RF MITLA Contract. After a 5-year effort, S AVI TECH Inc. received the Air Force contract 
for RF MTTLA tags on 15 April 1994. The Army will buy eight thousand tags over ten months and first delivery 
arrived in August-September 1994. AMCLOGSA PSCC acted as Army's technical representative for the 

United States Military Academy (USMA) Cadet Card Project. In August 1994 AMCLOGSA PSCC 

began a long term project to help USMA personnel. They acted in a consultant role to develop a 2-D bar 
code/MITLA ID card application to track all phases of a cadet's tenure with the academy. They hope the 
application will capture a cadet's entire academic, personnel, medical, clothing, etc., history and associated costs 
on a MITLA memory card that also serves as an ID card. 

Two-Dimensional (2-D) Bar Codes. In February 1994, the OASD(P&L) asked AMCLOGSA PSCC, as 
Chair of the LOGMARS Coordinating Group, to review the decision to adopt PDF-417 as the standard DOD 
2-D bar code. A new 2-D code called (Data Matrix) became available, and OASD wanted to be sure DOD had 
chosen the right one. As a result, PSCC and PM AMMOLOG participated as evaluators in an Association of 
Automotive Industry Manufactures (AAIM) test of various 2-D bar codes. The AAIM selected PDF-417 as the 
2-D bar code for use by the automotive industry. PSCC forwarded the AAIM results to OASD and the AIT 
Senior Advisory Group has yet to review them for a decision. 

Use of AIT in Management Army Prepositioned Ammunition War Reserves. In January-February 1994, 
AMCCOM in coordination with PM AMMOLOG and CASCOM tagged 30 ammunition containers with S AVI 
TECH RF MTTLA tags. The containers were loaded on the third Roll-On Roll-Off (RO-RO) ship. The Deputy 
Chief of Staff for Ammunition had HQ AMC lead for this action. 

Containerized Delivery of War Reserve Stocks-Thailand (WRS-T) Ammunition with AIT. In April 
1 994 AMCCOM and PM AMMOLOG did a successful field trial of 2-D bar codes (PDF-41 7) for the movement 
of ammunition. They used nine data elements considered critical for ammunition movements. 

Ozone Depleting Chemicals (ODCVHALON 1301 Replacement 

HALON 1301 production ceased on 31 December 1993. The Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention 
Support Office (AAPPSO), has overall Army responsibility for the ODC program. To conserve HALON 1301 
for future operational uses, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) has established a DOD HALON reserve for 
operational purposes. 

On 14 April 1994, the Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics (ADCSLOG) committed DA/AMC to 
fund a procurement of $5M for C0 2 hand-held fire extinguishers. They will use existing Supply Management 
Army (SMA) funds for this retrofit program. TACOM has initiated procurement of C0 2 fire extinguishers that 
will satisfy all Army requirements. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

TACOM has also formulated a plan for the retrofit/swap-out program for the C0 2 extinguishers that will 
replace the HALON extinguishers. The plan includes recovering HALON extinguishers that will sustain Army 
requirements until they have retrofitted all vehicles. 

HQ AMC (AMCLG) and HQDA (DALO-RMI) are aggressively pursuing the issue of accomplishing the 
retrofit/swap-out program with almost no cost to the users. 

ATCOM has assumed management review responsibilities for HALON 1 301 requisitions from Army units. 
They will review requisitions submitted by the field for HALON 1301 and review DLA reports submitted on the 
Army's reserve of HALON 1301 . They then report the condition of the reserve to AMC and the other Major 
Commands. ATCOM will also recommend the action(s) required to improve Army positions for the sake of 

Demilitarization (DEMIL) and Security Control Program 

Because of many incorrect DEMIL code assignments, a 100 percent review by the Defense Logistics Agency 
(DLA), with the support of all services has been completed. 

The team has developed a technique that will build records for each National Item Identification Number 
(NUN) by Federal Supply Class (FSC) identified by DOD Demilitarization Program Office (DLA). Status: 
Military Services have reviewed the first and second outputs of FSCs from DLA, with a completion date of 30 
January 1994. The completion of this phase will be the first of a complete NIIN review. 

The second phase consisted of all services providing members to serve on a review team at Battle Creek, MI 
for a hands-on review of all National Stock Numbers (NSNs). They assembled that team, and the review process 
has been completed. The next step in this process is for the services to receive suggested changes by DLA. Each 
service will review those DLA-suggested changes and input final DEMIL codes into the system. 

The third and final phase will consist of total DEMIL code changes. They must reconcile these between the 
services and DLA. 

Secondary and Major Item Destination Transportation (SDT) Policy 

DCSLOG coordinated with the Deputy Chief of Staff for Resource Management (DCSRM) to develop and 
publish guidance for Continental U.S. (CONUS) ports. They will use this guidance to decide whether they should 
apply a Secondary or Major Item SDT fund citation to continue the retrograde of these items. The Defense 
Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) office at Tobyhanna Army Depot (TOAD) that manages the fund cites 
for major items and ammunition also uses this guidance. Essentially, for secondaries, the fund cite is for the MSC 
managing the item. For major items, the fund cite is from HQ AMC. One data element for the port to use is the 
Military Standard Transportation and Movement Procedures (MILSTAMP) Transportation Account Code 
(TAC). This code appears on the manifest prepared by the OCONUS shipper. These TACs help to identify 
secondary or major end items. While not totally reliable, especially for containers, this procedure is the only one 
available at this time. This procedure easily manages items such as ammunition because of the ports they are 
limited to, documentation and packaging. This is similar for major end items such as vehicles and weapon 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) 

With the Systems Integration and Management Activity (SIMA) becoming a fee-for-service activity for 
systems maintenance, early 1993, funding for EDI became a new requirement. The Office of the Director of 
Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications, and Computers (ODISC4), the Transportation 
Command (USTRANSCOM), HQDA, and the Strategic Logistics Agency (SLA) funded SIMA's effort to place 
EDI in the Standard Depot System (SDS). This is how AMC will comply with the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense (OSD) policy setting up EDI for transportation documents. In the early 1980's, the OSD Transportation 
Policy Office determined that the largest and fastest payback for investing in EDI. It was via transportation 
documents, especially since they involve industry via common carriers. They also decided because of the very 
controlled environment and regulatory controls OSD had already established for transporters worldwide. 

FY94 DBOF Supply Management Army (SMA) Capital Budget Program 

The DBOF capital budget is the mechanism of funding for qualifying investments. The SMA capital budget 
is for those investments where the SMA business area is the sole or primary benefiting activity. Only the SMA 
cost center receives the depreciation charges on these investments. If certain items have a system unit or life cycle 
cost of more than $25,000, they will capitalize and depreciate them over a period of five years. These items 
include Automatic Data Processing Equipment (ADPE) and Telecommunications Equipment with Software 
Development or Modernization. The FY94 Capital Budget included costs associated with continuing the Single 
Stock Fund Proof of Principle at Fort Hood. The Joint Logistics Services Center (JLSC) previously funded this 
effort before a corporate decision to return the program for service funding in FY94. The budget also included 
funding for the Standard Army Automated Contracting Systems (SAACONS). SAACONS responded to 
Executive Order 12352, March 1992, which directs the development of a standard government-wide procurement 
system. SAACONS is the most comprehensive and sophisticated automated contracting package in the Federal 
Government today. It uses enhanced commercial-type software and automated data processing equipment to 
support 256 Army Installation contracting offices. The FY94 execution program was $15.957M. 

AMC Installation Division (AMC-ID) Retail Supply Management Army 

The AMC Installation Division (AMC-ID) consists of activities conducting retail Army operations. The 
AMC-ID Supply Management Army (SMA) account is responsible for financing the procurement pipeline and 
inventories of secondary item supplies, materiels and equipment at Class II installations. These installations 
report to HQ AMC as their Major Command (MACOM). 

The AMC-ID SMA account finances maintenance, rebuilding, research and development, and Class U 
hospital centers. This funding authority also supports troop training, clothing sales stores, and subsistence to 
exclude commissary store sales. 

The retail division earns funding authority based upon a DOD approved Unit Cost Goal (UCG). They 
established the FY94 UCG at .100 that allowed every dollar sold to earn a dollar of spending authority. They 
compute the funding authority as a dollar value equivalent to the UCG times gross sales less credit returns. The 
FY94 sales base was $340M. The division will pay customers an estimated $19M for returns. This equals an 
FY94 funding authority of $321 M. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

AMC actual obligations against the AMC-ID program in FY94 were $321 M. This represents a 100 percent 
obligation rate against available and earned funding authority. 


FY94 was a big year for RETROEUR in repairing and redistributing excess assets from the USAREUR 
drawdown to fill other valid Army requirements. RETROEUR returned more than 7,600 vehicles from 
USAREUR to four National Guard repair sites, two Active Army sites, and 15 Army Reserve sites across the 
United States. Of this quantity, they repaired 1712 for issue to Army Active and Reserve Components. 
RETROEUR will return approximately one thousand more vehicles from USAREUR for this repair program, 
which to extend for two more years. Besides the vehicles, RETROEUR is returning approximately 3400 
containers of Class II and VII non-rolling stock from USAREUR through FY98. In FY94, it returned 447 
containers to Blue Grass Station, Kentucky, where it is temporarily storing and redistributing the assets to Army 
claimants. It has issued approximately $12.0 million of non-rolling stock free to Army claimants in this fiscal 

Wholesale Supply Management Army (SMA) Program 

The Supply Management Army (SMA) is one of three Army business areas under the Defense Business 
Operations Fund (DBOF). The wholesale SMA account funds secondary item acquisition and depot level repair 
and the associated logistics operations costs. AMC earns funding or Operating Cost Authority (OCA) at a rate 
per dollar of sales. This represents the Unit Cost Goal (UCG). 

OSD approved the Army at a UCG of 0.88 in FY94, or the authority to spend $0.88 per dollar sold. This 
UCG earned AMC funding authority equivalent to $2.37B based on FY94 year-end sales of $4.28B. 

AMC executed its fully funded depot repair requirement of $564M. AMC also executed an FY94 hardware 
acquisition program of $1 .1 5B. The Army continued to operate under a 65 percent Congressional restriction on 
inventory reinvestment. This required Army to constrain its replenishment acquisitions to 65 percent of net sales. 
Congress allowed the Services to seek relief from the restriction if readiness concerns dictated such action. 
However, the Army did not suffer any adverse readiness impacts in FY94 because of the Congressional hardware 
cap. AMC executed its acquisition requirements at 61.7 percent vs. the Congressional cap of 65 percent. 

The Logistics Operations budget funds the secondary item support costs. These include the Inventory 
Control Point (ICP) operating costs (primarily the payroll), the cost of supply depot operations and second 
destination transportation (both ways). HQDA capped the AMC logistics Operations Program at $657. 1M. 
AMC executed a total of $656.2M of the approved $657. 1M. The delta to the approved was the result of 
systemic problems in getting the obligation processed; otherwise, they would have executed the full cap. 

AMC ended FY94 by fully executing the wholesale SMA account. AMC executed the program at a unit cost 
of 0.88033. The approved UCG was 0.88. AMC executed its program within all caps or restrictions. 

Total Army Inventory Management (TAIM) Program 

The application of the Total Army Inventory Management (TAIM) Program has realized significant 
accomplishments. DCSLOG's approach to this program has been three-fold: the DCS wants to ensure the 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

requirement drops are in line with AMC's current force structure and OPTEMPO, and as the requirements 
decrease, the command's acquisition programs also decrease. Also, during this process, DCSLOG wants to 
ensure that it keeps aggressively eliminating excess assets. Each area is independent of the other, however, they 
are all part of the process. 

Force reductions continue to drive AMC's requirements process. From FY93 to FY94, AMC has reduced 
its requirements by $1.4B. Starting from FY90, the command's requirements have been reduced $10B. 

AMC's Procurement leadtime initiative focuses on the historically high leadtimes and reduces them 30 
percent. AMC will be monitoring this program for one year to ensure DCSLOG can achieve the reduction 
through the procurement process. Because of the many downsizing initiatives, the command's retail customers 
at the field level are more aware of the need to manage their dollars wisely. They also realize the more repairs 
they can do on existing equipment, the more dollars they will save. 

In the last five years, AMC's due-ins beyond the requirements objective have dropped about 88 percent (over 
a billion-dollar drop). For FY94 alone, the command has had a $100M drop. 

AMC has also begun a new economic cutback decision model. The command set up the model as 
recommended by the General Accounting Office (GAO). This model puts cancellation costs into a computer 
program that identifies the actual economic feasibility of reducing or canceling a contract. MSCs feed in the costs 
to cancel an existing contract, then the computer program decides whether to cancel. Usually it averages around 
a 20-30 percent or less chance to cancel. For FY94 alone AMC has cut back contracts totaling $238.2M. 

The command's wholesale inventory has come down half a billion dollars from FY93 to FY94. This 
reduction is significant to reducing overall supply system costs, because it represents a 13 percent reduction in 
AMC's wholesale secondary item inventory. DCSLOG expects further reductions when DOD makes additional 
force structure demand reductions on the command's requirements determination process. Since DCSLOG began 
forecasting force structure downsizing starting in FY89, AMC's inventory levels have continued to drop. 

Consumable Item Transfer (CIT) 

The CIT program involves the transfer of consumable items to the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). DMRD 
926, Inventory Control Point (ICP) Consolidation (February 1990) governs this initiative. It is a two-phase 

Phase I commenced 1 April 1991 and continues today with the transfer of "obvious" consumables to DLA. 
All AMC ICPs/ Activities that are participating in this initiative have informed DLA of the transfer candidates 
and are now in a clean-up mode. They anticipate that Phase I will be completed before 1 March 1995, when 
approximately 98,000 Army consumable items will have transferred to DLA. 

Phase II is in the planning stage at this time. The Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (ADUSD), 
Logistics, has appointed HQ DLA as the executive agent for Phase II, CIT. They will chair a joint 
Service/ Agency (S/A) work group. The group will develop a Plan of Action and Milestones (POAM), complete 
with a transfer schedule and a suspense date to ADUSD by 15 November 1994. These actions are on schedule 
to meet the ADUSD suspense date. ADUSD will likely approve the POAM and transfer schedule within 90 days 
of submission with follow-on business rules, schedule and technical MOAs established and agreed to by S/A. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

The first Phase n, CIT, candidate offerings to DLA will occur on or about 1 July 1995. Presently, it is not known 
how many Army items will transfer under Phase II. However, ADUSD has mandated that they complete Phase 
H by the end of FY97. 

AMC Secondary Item Mobilization Account 

The Mobilization program is a retail operation that buys War Reserve materiel from the Defense Logistics 
Agency (DLA) and the General Services Administration (GSA). They hold the materiel under Army control for 
rotation replacement of Army-owned War Reserve requirements. 

Effective 1 October 1993, the AMC Mobilization account has taken ownership of world-wide DLA/GSA 
managed Army MACOM owned stocks. This change has increased AMC's mobilization responsibilities as the 
Army Service Item Control Center (SICC) while it moves items under the Consumable Item Transfer (CIT). 

The AMC Mobilization account earns funding authority based on an HQDA approved Unit Cost Goal 
(UCG). HQDA approved the command's UCG for FY94 at 122.5 percent. AMC earned funding authority based 
on this UCG times its sales base of $5.0M. This earned AMC authority to spend $6.1 M in FY94. 

The FY94 year-end actuals for the AMC Mobilization account was an obligation of $6.0M. This equals fully 
executing the FY94 Supply Management Army (SMA) funds supporting the mobilization account activities. 

Unique Item Tracking (UIT) 

Since 1978, two of the Army's tracking areas (accountability by quantity and visibility by serial number) have 
continued to experience high level concern. Prior to June 1994, limited resources had a negative impact on 
regulatory compliance and system improvements. 

In the June 1994 time frame, the Army changed the concept and execution time lines for resolving the UIT 
problems. The new notion will combine the present multiple data bases (the Armament and Chemical Acquisition 
and Logistics Activity's (ACALA) DODSASP, CECOM Communications Security Logistics Activity's (CCSLA) 
CCI, and MIIC's CBS-X) to a single data base (MIIC's CBS-X). This centralized reporting effort will use the 
latest advanced communications techniques from the Defense Execution System (DES) and Total Asset Visibility 

Application of the UIT initiative will be in three phases: 

• Phase I will allow improved field and wholesale level (stock record account and property book) UIT reporting 
by using MIIC's CBS-X initiative and the current 80 positions record. The expected application time frame 
is January 1995. 

• Phase II will allow MUC not only to collect all UIT data, but also to manage the data. The application time 
frame to be determined. 

• Phase HJ will carry out further improvements in the field and wholesale reporting using the MIIC database 
and a variable length record. The application time frame to be determined also. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

In June 1994, DA provided funding in the amount of $450,826 for Phase I and $204,900 for Phase II. 

Total Asset Visibility (TAV) 

Since 1990, the Army has been developing a TAV capability to retrieve worldwide asset information. 
Presently, TAV provides a capability that improves visibility of assets in-storage, in-process, in-use (end items), 
and in-transit. 

TAV data is near real-time through use of reach-through technology and a state-of-the-art communications 
network. It's transparent to the customer whether the information resides locally or at one of the many remote 
distributed data bases. 

In FY94, TAV has made major strides, incorporating increased user and expanded visibility capabilities. 
One recent usage of TAV is the In-transit Visibility (JTV) of sustainment stocks to Haiti. This capability 
provides Commanders and Logisticians insight on the status of materiel movement and when it will be received. 
The ITV portion of TAV is still in a prototype and is aided by Automated Identification Technology (AIT) (i.e., 
radio frequency and laser cards). ATT applications have resulted in increased visibility of the entire transportation 
pipeline, especially enhanced visibility of consolidated shipments. 

There were over 2,000 users at the beginning of FY94. By the end of FY94 TAV users were slightly more 
than 3,000. Total users will be 8,000 once TAV is fully fielded. TAV sites are in CONUS as well as OCONUS. 
Next major TAV fielding will be Korea in FY95. 

TAV capabilities are boundless. In fact, OSD initiated a TAV Joint Task Force (September 1994) to analyze 
integrating TAV DOD-wide. 

Some significant FY94 meetings on TAV included the following: TAV Integration Conference held at 
LOGS A, Huntsville AL (July 1994); The Council of Colonels held at HQ AMC, Alexandria, VA (August 1994); 
General Officer Steering Committee (GOSC) held at HQ AMC, Alexandria, VA (September 1994); Initial DOD 
TAV Task Force Meeting held at Office of the Secretary of Defense, Alexandria, VA (September 1994). 

Single Stock Fund (SSF) 

The Army planned to develop the SSF under the auspices of the Joint Logistics Systems Center (JLSC). An 
SSF Proof of Principle (POP) Concept was developed by HQDA, Strategic Logistics Agency (SLA), with 
extensive AMC participation, which will provide the basis and justification for carrying out of a Joint SSF 
throughout Army and DOD. 

The SSF idea merges the management of wholesale and retail inventory and financial accounting. The SSF 
will help readiness and logistics power projection with down-sized logistics support structure through improved 
asset visibility and streamlined business processes. 

A preliminary functional economic analysis estimated SSF will produce significant savings. By the end of 
1993, the Proof of Principle systems development had been completed. Formal integration testing revealed the 
need for significant functional enhancements, primarily in financial accounting products and procedures. 


Materiel Readiness AMCLG 

The actual start of live POP operations was deferred while fixes were made and bench tested. Live 
application at Fort Hood was accomplished without significant problems. The U.S. Army Depot Systems 
Command (DESCOM) Liaison Office functioned as AMC liaison and advisor on the ground at Fort Hood. 
Subsequent operations revealed additional problems with the POP financial idea, but showed the central asset 
management (CAM) idea to be sound. 

Major success stories include the retrograde pre-screen, excess reutilization and redistribution. As of 30 
September 1994 all major issues had been documented. SIMA will fix them prior to the end of the POP. 

Functional evaluation involved AMSAA, LOGSA, MEA and all the MSCs. The ATCOM was tasked to 
develop a business plan for post-POP operations in an SSF environment. Meanwhile, this headquarters and SLA 
planned a follow-on extension of SSF to the rest of the Army. 

Public-Public Competition 

Public Law 101-510, BRAC 91, required that selected Army depots and Sacramento Air Logistics Center 
(SM-ALC) compete for the Sacramento Army Depot (SAAD) workload. The office of the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense (Production and Logistics) directed establishment of a Joint Service working group (JSWG) to 
formulate policy and guide the competition process. 

The JSWG developed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) as the baseline plan to conduct the 
competition. The Office of the Secretary of Defense approved the MOU on 1 2 December 1991 . It requires use 
of the Cost Comparability Handbook and divides the workload into nine groups. 

The nine groups were awarded in 1993. Each group was awarded for five years. Tobyhanna Army Depot 
(TOAD) won four groups: Airborne/Electronics for $4.7M, Radio for $5.0M, Intel/Electronic Warfare for $7.4M 
and Wire/Data Comm/S witches for $1 .4M. SM-ALC won in five areas: Fighting Vehicle Electronics for $3.7M, 
Electro-Optics/Night Vision for $50.0M, Radar for $3.5M, Gyro/Indicators for $1 .3M and TMDE/Radiac for 


In summary, competition is beneficial. It keeps downward pressure on costs and results in savings. The 
Army estimates 14 percent savings resulting from the FY91-93 competition programs. 


Materiel Readiness AMXED 


Mission and Organization 

The mission of the Office of the Executive Director for Conventional Ammunition (O/EDCA) is as follows: 
To help in managing and executing the Single Manager for Conventional Ammunition (SMCA) mission as 
delegated by DOD, DA, and the CG, AMC to the EDCA. O/EDCA responsibilities include the centralized 
management of conventional ammunition assigned to the SMCA/EDCA; planning, programming, and budgeting 
for resources required to accomplish the SMCA mission; maintaining coordination with military department 
headquarters' staffs and secretariats and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) in matters relating to the 
SMCA mission; participating in major policy meetings of DOD components; establishing an SMCA organization 
to support wartime and peacetime operations; serving as a focal point on critical Joint Service Actions, and 
assuring Joint Logistics Commanders' participation in SMCA related activities. 1 

Key Personnel 

Key Personnel assigned to this office are as follows: 

Authorized Manpower 
Executive Director USA LTG 

• LTG John Cobum (USA), Executive Director for Deputy Executive Director USN06 

Conventional Ammunition Executive Officer USA 04 

/-1/-AT tl »» nr /TTOAf\ rv Secretary (Steno/Office Automation) GS09 

• COL Thomas MagUire IE (USAF), Deputy Ad ™ nis t rati ve Services Assistant GS07 

Executive Director for Conventional Ammunition Plans and Programs Division (AMXED-ppj 

• CDR Robert DeStefanO (USN), Chief, Plans and Chief. Plans and Programs usafo6 

v ' Assistant for Plans and Programs GM 15 

Programs Division Joint Logistics Staff Officer USA 05 

• LTC Denny Cox (USMC), Chief, Production and Program Analyst gs 14 

. ' . . Program Analyst GS 14 

LoglStlCS Division Logistics Management Specialist GS 14 

• MAJ Ronald Settle (USA), Executive Officer Secretary / Stenographer GS07 

Production and Logistics Division (AMXED-PL) 

Chief, Production and Logistics USMC 05 

Update of the Conventional Ammunition Working Assistant for Production and Logistics GM 1 5 

Capital Fund (CAWCF ) Logistics Management Specialist GS 14 

" General Engineer GS 1 4 

Quality Assurance / Ammo Surveillance GS 14 

The future of the CAWCF has been the subject of 
intense scrutiny by Congress, particularly the House Appropriations Committee (HAC). FY94 appropriation 
language directed the Army to report on orderly procedures for closing out the CAWCF. It also allowed the Army 
to recommend improvements to the CAWCF instead of closure. The HAC expressed concern that financial 
management procedures are inconsistent and lacks a management focus. The Joint Services support the 
development of an improved CAWCF through the CAWCF Management Council. 

However, the HAC was not satisfied by the Army response in May of 1994. The Army recommended 
retention of the CAWCF and described the improvements to be made. The HAC proposed the CAWCF be shut 
down beginning 1 October 1994 (FY95). The Senate Appropriations Committee (SAC) allowed DOD and the 
Army another year to improve CAWCF or propose another fund. Final FY95 appropriation language supported 

'Unless otherwise noted,information in this section was taken from the Executive Director for Conventional 
Ammunition historical submission for FY94. 


Materiel Readiness AMXED 

the Senate language and added some further requirements. The Army is to report its recommendation to Congress 
by 30 May 1995. Now, the Single Manager is working toward improving the CAWCF. The major hurdle 
encountered thus far involves the upgrade of accounting and management reporting systems. The Assistant 
Secretary of the Army for Financial Management has hired Calibre Systems to assess short- and long-term 

Update of the Integrated Conventional Ammunition Procurement Plan (ICAPP) 

The ICAPP is published annually. It represents the integration of the Services' individual ammunition 
procurement plans. These plans are interwoven with production base equipment, facilities, and work-loading 
considerations. All of this is to ensure production of end items in the most efficient and economical manner 
possible. The basic purpose is to furnish the Secretary of Defense with current integrated planning data for 
reviewing Service budget requests. Also, it gives the Services a tool for defending their conventional ammunition 

During FY94, an ICAPP Quad-Service Review (QSR) was conducted. This was the first review since 
reduced Temporary Duty (TDY) funding cancelled them in 1988. All Services, except the Army, participated 
in the QSR. 

Sixteen changes to the Services ammunition procurement programs were recommended because of the 
O/EDCA review of the ICAPP. Many of these recommendations for more efficient and economical procurements 
have been carried out by the Services. This resulted in significant cost savings. The ICAPP was delivered to the 
OSD comptroller on 9 September 1994. This met the OSD Budget Estimate Submission deadline, as directed. 

Update of POD Directive 5160.65. Subject: SMC A: and the SMC A Charter 

AMXED had begun to revise the DOD Directive and the Army Charter in 1993 and continued in 1994. This 
was the result of a Total Quality Management (TQM) initiative. The revisions updated the functions, 
responsibilities, authorities, and relationships of the Single Manager for Conventional Ammunition ( SMC A) and 
the military Services. They also specified the current office titles for those organizations involved in SMCA 
activities. EDCA had the participation of OSD and the military Services for several iterations. The directive is 
currently being staffed at OSD. On 22 August 1994 the Charter was forwarded to the Secretary of the Army for 
signature and publication. EDCA anticipates that the charter will be completely staffed and signed by 3 1 March 

Military Construction of Ammunition Facilities 

In March 1993, the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Logistics, Materiel and Resource Management 
asked EDCA to obtain information from the Services. This information concerned their ammunition-related 
military construction plans for the current POM period. On 4 April 1994, LTG Pigaty signed a memo addressed 
to the Services requesting this data. The Services responded to the O/EDCA in April and on 4 May the O/EDCA 
forwarded the information to OSD. OSD provided their response to Congress on 5 August 1994. 


Materiel Readiness AMCSB 


Mission. Organization, and Personnel 

The missions and functions of the HQ AMC Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
(SADBU) remained the same in FY94. It continued serving as AMC's principal advisor for the Small Business 
Program. The office began FY94 with an authorized personnel level of two spaces. The personnel level was 
officially increased to four during the second quarter. Ms. Jana Tull acted as Associate Director from 1 October 
1993 to 1 April 1994. She was helped by Procurement Analyst, Ms. Doris Agnew, and Mr. Rick Sarrano. Mr. 
Sarrano performed as the temporary office automation assistant. Mrs. Barbara Binney became the Associate 
Director on 4 April 1994. Ms. Nancy Presutti was hired for the new secretarial position. Ms. Tull returned to 
her duties as Senior Procurement Analyst on 4 April 1994. Mr. Sarrano departed on 8 April 1994.' 

FY94 Small Business Program 

Although obligations continued to decline, FY 94 
was another successful year for the AMC Small 
Business Program. AMC exceeded all the prime 
contract goals assigned by HQ, Department of the 
Army. The program success can be attributed to the 
Command emphasis placed on the program throughout the year. 

AMC Pamphlet AMC-P-715-14. "How to Do Business With AMC" 

The AMC Pamphlet AMC-P-715-14, "How to Do Business With AMC," was redesigned and updated in 
FY94. The pamphlet is now more user-friendly and contains key information and instructions aimed at helping 
Small and Disadvantaged Businesses interested in doing business with AMC. 

FY94 SADBU Award for Significant Contributions in Small Business 

MG Prather, the AMC Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development and Engineering was honored by 
the Secretary of the Army. He was the FY94 recipient of the Secretary of the Army SADBU Award for 
significant contributions in Small Business. Through MG Prather's support, the Army became the leading service 
to strengthen the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions. 

GENESIS Project 

During FY94, AMC was asked by HQ, Department of the Army (DA) to lead in carrying out the GENESIS 
Project. Phase I of the project involves ten SDB firms initially selected by HQDA. The project's goal is to 
promote the development of selected SDBs within urban inner cities. Its objective is to raise the visibility of the 
GENESIS firms with available government resources and programs. This is an effort to increase the SDBs' 
business base. 




Total Small Business 



Small Disadvantaged Business 



Small Business R&D 



Women Owned Small Business 



Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities/Minority Institutions 



'Unless otherwise noted, all information was taken from the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business 
Utilization historical submission for FY94. 


Materiel Readiness AMCJO 


Joint Logistics Commanders' Meetings 

The Office of the Special Assistant for Joint Activities was responsible for the actions involved in the 
meetings of the Joint Logistics Commanders (JLC), which included key logistical commanders from the Air 
Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) as principals. The meetings had 
previously been held on a quarterly basis, but at the end of FY92 the decision had been made to hold them only 
three times a year, in February, June and September. In FY94 meetings were held on on the following dates and 

• 6-7 October 1993 at the Defense General Supply Center, Richmond, VA, hosted by the Defense Logistics 
Agency 1 . 

• 14 and 16 February at the Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation Command (STRICOM), Orlando, FL 
hosted by the Commander of AMC 2 . 

• 6 and 9 June at Combat Logistics Group TWO, Norfolk, VA, hosted by the Deputy Chief of Naval 
Operations, Logistics 3 . 

• 12 and 15 September at the Arnold Engineering Development Center, Tullahoma, TN, hosted by the 
Commander, Air Force Materiel Command 4 . 

'Memorandum for Record, Subject: Joint Logistics Commanders (JLC) Meeting, 4 and 7 October 1993, 
22 November 1993. 

2 Memorandum for Record, Subject: Joint Logistics Commanders' (JLC) Meeting, 14 and 16 February 1994, 

11 March 1994. 

3 Memorandum for Record, Subject: Joint Logistics Commanders' (JLC) Meeting, 6 and 9 June 1994, 13 July 

Memorandum for Record, Subject: Joint Logistics Commanders' (JLC) Meeting, 12 and 15 September 1994, 

12 October 1994. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 



AMC-Europe. AMC-Europe has continued its transition from a total staff headquarters to an operational 
headquarters. AMC-E assumed command and control of the European Redistribution Facility during the last 
quarter of FY93. It added the mission of operating the Central Staging Facility at the beginning of FY94. Both 
activities were formerly part of the Mainz Army Depot. The staging operation is totally reimbursable and this 
year issued more than 380,000 items to USAREUR units and soldiers. 1 

The Program Manager, Future Europe role continues to be an active one. To date they have removed more 
than 40,449 excess vehicles from U.S. Army Europe's property books. Another 21 ,487 remain to meet the end 
state figures. Two major accomplishments occurred during the FY. AMC-Europe inspected and accepted 
equipment loaded on board ships as Army Reserve package three or Prepositioned (Prepo) Afloat. This effort 
involved people from across AMC and each ship was loaded on schedule. The Army wanted to move at least 300 
Class II and VII containers, non-rolling stock, from Europe during the year. After close coordination with 
USAREUR organizations and a major effort by the European Redistribution Facility (ERF), they shipped 766 

AMC-E continued to reorganize the Logistics Assistance Program. That organization formed the basis for 
the cadre Logistics Support Element in Europe. The staff of AMC-Europe formed the support group necessary 
to allow a Logistics Support Element (LSE) to deploy and function. They tested this idea during the humanitarian 
efforts in support of Rwanda. AMC-E started the emergency operations center (EOC) and provided staff support 
to BG Gerald, Commander of LSE-Rwanda. They gave him the necessary equipment, supplies, and 
administrative support as he deployed to Mombasa, Kenya. Additionally, the command provided technical 
support to the USAREUR Task Force deployed to Rwanda. 

The Logistics Assistance Office, Europe (LAO-EUROPE). During FY94, the Logistics Assistance 
Program (LAP) in Europe realigned according to the AMC LAP Process Action Team's plan. The Commander, 
AMC approved these tenets in June 1993. LAO-Europe's realignment was effective 8 January 1994. This action 
eliminated the Regional LAOs and the Major Subordinate Command (MSC) regional supervisors. All LAOs 
started reporting directly to the Chief, LAO-Europe. This included the former regional offices at V Corps and 
21st Theater Army Area Command (21st TAACOM). All MSC Logistics Assistance Representatives (LARs) 
were placed under the LAOs for first line supervision and administrative support. The rating chain for the Chief, 
LAO-Europe and the MSC senior command representatives (SCRs) changed. AMC-Europe's commander 
became the rater and the parent commands became the senior raters. Personnel from the U.S. Army Missile 
Command (MICOM) filled the LAO position at the 32nd Army Air Defense Command (AADCOM). Personnel 
from the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM) filled the LAO position at the 5th Signal 
Command (SIG CMD). 

During this fiscal year, LAO-Europe continued to drawdown the workforce because of force reductions in 
Europe and program realignment. They completed the drawdown with minimum impact on employees through 

'Unless otherwise noted, information in this section was taken from the AMC-Europe Historical Submission 
for FY94. 


Materiel Readiness 


attrition, reassignments, retirements, and scheduled rotations. The LAO office in Nuerenberg, Germany, a 
sub-office of the LAO-3d Corps Support Command (COSCOM), closed in February 1994. The LAO office at 
the 1 1th Armored Calvary Regiment (ACR) in Fulda, Germany closed in March 1994. As of 30 September 1994, 
nine LAO field offices were in Europe: The 5th Corps, 21st TAACOM, 32nd AADCOM, 3rd COSCOM, 3rd 
Infantry Division (3rd ID), 1st Aviation Division (1st AD), 5th SIG CMD, 7th Army Training Command (ATC), 
and the Southern European Task Force (SETAF). LAO-Europe has achieved its civilian end-strength for FY94 
with 28 of the authorized 29 positions filled. 

Armament Chemical Acquisition Logistics Activity (AC ALA). The AC ALA Europe Logistics Assistance 
Branch has continued to downsize in time with US AREUR's reductions during FY94. Close monitoring of troop 
reductions has enabled ACALA to meet customer needs and kept personnel turbulence at a minimum. They 
reduced their authorized personnel total by two during this FY. One person departed the Nuerenberg area (May 
1994) and one person departed the Mannheim area (November 1993). They will replace neither of these 

Key Personnel 

AMC-Europe, LAO-Europe, ERF, ACALA and ATCOM (U.S. Army Aviation and Troop Command) key 
personnel are as follows at the end of FY94: 



COL Arley H. McCormick 
Mr. Richard Roane 
CPT Duane Gamble 
Mr. Herbert Denburg 
Mr. Robert Fitzsimons 
LTC Ronald Strand 

MAJ Patrick Virgilio 
Mr. Craig J. Daly 
Mr. Warren Boyett 
Mr. Gary Wetterhall 
Mr. James Wafer 
Mr. John Leonard 
Mr. Philip Jessup 
MAJ Juan R. Garcia 
Mr. Alfonsa Archuletta 
Mr. Charles E. Slyker 
Mr. Phillip R. Preston 
Ms. Phyliss J. Norton 
MAJ James Gutierrez 
Mr. Terry Spurrier 
LTC Martin J. Ayers 
Mr. Vernon Salisbury 
Mr. Dan Paquette 
Mr. Leo Baghdoian 


Deputy to the Commander 

Executive Officer 

Protocol Officer 

Director of Logistics Systems 

Commander, ERF 

Director, ERF 

Commander, ERF V Corps 

Logistics Management Specialist 

Chief, Logistics Systems Division 

Chief, Materiel Fielding Division 

Staging Site Manager 

Director, Resource Management and Support 

Chief, Management and Budget Division 

Plans Officer 

Director of Information Management 

Chief, LAO-Europe 

Region Chief, LAO-Europe V Corps 

Region Chief, LAO-Europe 21st TAACOM 

Operations Officer 

Senior Command Representative, ACALA 

Commander, ATCOM 

Chief, Logistics Assistance, ATCOM 

Senior Command Representative, CECOM 

Senior Command Representative, MICOM 


Civilians Authorized: 72 Civilians on Board: 53 

Contractors on Board: 423 

Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Mr. Bill Hyatt Senior Command Representative, TACOM 

Mr. Gary Hodge Tech Director, 74th Maintenance Battalion (FWD) 

Key Personnel Changes 

AMC-Europe's Command Group. The AMC-Europe Manpower Statistics 

„, . _ . , , , . Beginning of Fiscal Year 1994 

Command Group had tWO key personnel Changes. Military Authorized: 3 Military on Board: 12 

COL Maness relinquished the Commander's position Civilians Authorized: 64 Civilians on Board: 57 

that he held since 8 July 1 992 for a Staff position at End of Fjsca| Year , 994 Contractors on Board: 433 

Headquarters AMC. He departed AMC-Europe on Military Authorized: 7 Military on Board: 8 

14 July 1994. COL Arley H. McCormick assumed 
the commander's position on 23 August 1 994 after 

leaving Blue Grass Army Depot. LTC Martin Ayers Logistics Assistance Office-Europe Manpower Statistics 

, r ... . ,„„. ., „„. Beginningof Fiscal Year 1994 

was acting commander from 1 4 July 1 994 until COL Military Authorized: 8 Military on Board: 5 

McCormick assumed command. On 24 May 1 994, Civilians Authorized: 39 Civilians on Board: 36 

CPT Greg Benda, Executive Officer, departed for an m , ary Authorized: End of ™ Y ~™ m Board: 

assignment in Alaska. CPT Duane Gamble assumed Civilians Authorized: 30 Civilians on Board: 28 

the executive officer's position on 5 September 1994. 

Directorate for Logistics Support. Mr. Robert Fitzsimons became the Director for Logistics Support on 

1 5 May 1 994. The position of Chief, Materiel Fielding Division became Mr. Gary Wetterhall's permanent 
assignment. Mr. Warren Boyett replaced Mr. Fitzsimons as Chief, Logistics Support Division. 

Directorate for Resource Management and Support. MAJ Juan Garcia became the Plans Officer on 3 1 
July 1994. His former assignment was as the senior command representative (SCR) of the MICOM, Europe 

European Redistribution Facility (ERF). The command group for the ERF experienced a 100 percent 
turnover. On 15 August 1994, LTC Grissom relinquished command of the ERF to assume duties at Fort Knox, 
Kentucky. LTC Strand, who assumed the commander's position on 9 September 1994, replaced him. MAJ 
Patrick Virgilio replaced MAJ Perry as Commander, ERF-Hanau on 15 July 1994. Mr. Tolbert, the Deputy, 
returned to CONUS after accepting a position with DODDs; recruitment for his replacement is under way. 

Director of Information Management (DOIM). Mr. Alfonso Archuletta assumed duties as the AMC- 
Europe DOIM on 15 January 1994. Mr. William Burke was acting director until Mr. Archuletta came aboard. 

Logistics Assistance Office, Europe. LTC Ronald G. Reppert, Chief, LAO-Europe, 1 st Armored Division 
departed in January 1994 for Tobyhanna Army Depot, PA. MAJ Charles Maurer left his position as Chief, 
LAO-Europe, 1 1th Armored Cavalry Regiment in January 1994. He became Chief, LAO-Europe 1st Armored 
Division. MAJ Wesley Jackson became Chief, LAO-Europe, 3rd Corps Support Command in February 1994. 
MAJ Charles Maurer, Chief, LAO-Europe, 1st Armored Division departed in April 1994 to attend Command 
and General Staff College. LTC Gerald S. Dalzell became Chief, LAO-Europe, 1st Armored Division in April 
1994. Mr. John Stevens (MICOM), Chief, LAO-Europe, 32nd Army Air Defense Command, departed in May 
1994 for Redstone Arsenal, AL. Mr. Richard Brown (MICOM) became Chief, LAO-Europe, 32d AADCOM 
in April 1994. MAJ Harry D. Flanagan, LAO-Europe Operations Officer departed in July 1994 for the U.S. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Naval War College in Newport, RI. MAJ James M. Gutierrez became the LAO-Europe Operations Officer in 
September 1994. 

Status of Program Manager. Future Europe (PMFE) 

As representative for all FUTURE EUROPE actions in the theater, PMFE devoted itself to Retrograde 
Europe (RETROEUR), AR-2 and AR-3. The European theater successfully accomplished its efforts to provide 
serviceable assets to AR-3 (PREPO AFLOAT). Application of lessons learned from RETROEUR 93 resulted 
in better oversight and execution of RETROEUR 94. PMFE participated in bi-weekly Deputy Commander-in- 
Chief (DCINC) Future Europe In-Process Reviews (JPRs). The 21st TAACOM also held weekly IPRs. Various 
action officer meetings continue. 

Status of RETROEUR 

PMFE is primarily concerned with retrograding excess Class U and VJJ materiel to units in other Major 
Commands (MACOMs): Forces Command (FORSCOM), Southern Command, Eighth United States Army 
(EUSA) and the Army National Guard Battalion (NGB). During this FY, 28,581 vehicles have dropped from 
USAREUR's books (40,449 to date). This means 21,487 excess vehicles remain before the Army European 
Theater reaches the 65K end state. Retrograded to the U.S. during FY94 were 1 10 short tons of excess ammo. 
For FY95, 100 short tons remain for retrograde. 

PMFE held the December 1993 RETROEUR conference. Representatives from DA, USAREUR, 
AMC-Europe, AMC and AMC MSCs attended the conference. The conferees estimated that they could call 
7,600 pieces of serviceable or economically repairable rolling stock rearward during FY94. Taking the cue from 
the exercise "Ocean Venture 93," they divided all rolling stock retrograde materiel into discreet "packages." This 
requires close coordination between DA, AMC, Tank-Automotive Command (TACOM), PMFE and 200th 
Theater Army Materiel Management Center (TAMMC). They make sure to fill bonafide Army requirements with 
USAREUR excess. The packaging is an easy way for managers to track individual items and fill the Army's 
requirements elsewhere. During FY94, PMFE retrograded 7,557 pieces. 

As the process for returning rolling stock firmed, DA focused on retrograding class II and VII Non-Rolling 
Stock (NRS). They waived the FTFVFTR process. The Army National Guard Site at Lexington, Kentucky, was 
chosen to receive all class II and VU NRS except: (1) Intelligence and Electronic Warfare (IEW) - EMRA, Vint 
Hill Farms Station; (2) Small arms - Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) or Letterkenny Army Depot (LEAD); (3) 
Communications Security (COMSEC) - Tobyhanna Army Depot (TOAD). 

They exceeded the original goal of 300 container loads of class II and VII NRS. During FY94, they stuffed 
and shipped 766 containers. Part of this success was due to the participation by the ERF in moving this materiel. 
ERF stuffed and shipped 274 40 ft. containers. 

In FY94, the DA Inspector General (DAIG) raised concerns over the retrograde of Condition Code (CC) "H" 
(uneconomically repairable) stocks. In response, PMFE organized a team to inspect RETROEUR stock to assure 
that they did not transport scrap to CONUS. The team arrived in-country 25 April 1994 and consisted of four 
TACOM representatives, two ACALA representatives and one CECOM representative. The classifications of 
689 vehicles were upgraded and 1 7 vehicles downgraded. By not transporting scrap materiel overseas and 
directing serviceable materiel straight to units, they made a substantial savings. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Status of AR-3 (Prepo Afloat) 

Materiel for this "Floating Army Reserve" 2X2 Heavy Brigade came from several sources. Most came from 
USAREUR Drawdown Army units and Prepositioning of Materiel Configured to Unit Sets (POMCUS) excess 
in Europe. The balance came from Army units in CONUS. Eight ships were to be loaded from the port of 
Antwerp, Belgium. Inspectors examined and accepted all materiel at donor units' motor pools and applicable 
POMCUS sites. Depot Systems Command (DESCOM), with PMFE, began planning for the inspection and 
accountability of AR-3 assets in March 1993. In September 1993, the team (68 inspectors, including 1 1 soldiers 
from the Third U.S. Army) commenced operations in five locations. The number of locations would later increase 
to a high of 12. AMC-Europe provided administrative, logistic and automation support until completion on 29 
April 1994. They inspected and accepted more than 4,000 pieces of rolling stock and 52,000 other items 
necessary to equip the Brigade. 

Status of AR-2 

PMFE began planning to move Theater Reserve Unit Sets (TRU) / Army Readiness Package South (ARPS) 
to AR-2 in FY93. They would subsequently move to AMC control. One DESCOM Liaison Representative and 
one Logistics Management Institute (LMI) Representative worked on the transfer of assets, facilities and 
personnel. PMFE provided logistic support to all attached personnel and visitors regarding this project. They 
transferred accountability of AR-2 to AMC in October 1994. Command and control of General Support Center 
Leghorn was set to transfer to DESCOM on 1 October 1994. 


USAREUR Direct Support System (DSS) Air Line of Communication (ALOC) Program 

AMC-E continued participation as a key member of the USAREUR Order Ship Time (OST) Task Force 
during the report period. Quarterly Task Force meetings helped to maintain command emphasis on the theater 
DSS/ALOC program, and solve, or reduce program problems. Additionally AMC-Europe participated in the 
European Distribution Conference held during the same period. The conference was to familiarize attendees with 
distribution systems, current performance, and initiatives to improve customer service levels. AMC-Europe is 
a member of the European Distribution Executive Steering Committee. The Committee's charter is to ensure that 
everyone remains focused on the issues that resulted from the conference. 

European Redistribution Facility (ERF) 

In 1994, the ERF has made strong advances in providing world-class support to customers. It was one of 
the most productive years for USAREUR's war on excess and for expeditiously handling Depot Level Reparables. 
Approximately 540,000 receipts were processed. While many customers have inactivated, AMC prepositioning 
of new customers for humanitarian missions has drawn increased support. Both HQ, ERF, and ERF V Corps 
established proactive assistance programs to develop a close working relationship with their customers. 
Customer satisfaction is our number one priority and knowing the customer's needs and requirements help us to 
achieve this goal. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

HQ, ERF, and ERF V Corps continued to carry out improvements for employees. These included seasonal 
work clothing; work environment upgrades to improve employee morale; and work enhancing tools and 
equipment. They put additional automation equipment in place to simplify employee processing of materiel. 

Continuous improvements have enabled better materiel processing flow within both installations. This 
included the following: new overhead doors; improved major assembly yard and receiving areas; new fencing 
and gates for enhanced accessibility and security; and upgrading the conveyance for receipt processing. Both 
depots have got additional buildings for storage and classification of materiel. 

One major ongoing automation program is the establishment of Logistics Applications of Automated 
Marking and Reading Symbols (LOGMARS) capability. They have obtained high speed Laser Printers and are 
awaiting installation and software design. Inventory, Quality Assurance (QA), and shipping areas now have 
LOGMARS processing capabilities. 

Status of Redistribution Efforts for FY94 

The ERF executed its mission of receipt/issue, storage, and retrograde/transhipment of US AREUR Class 
DC excess materiel during this reporting period. US AREUR and the Army National Guard requested the ERF 
also process excess Class II and Class IV. The ERF redistributed 279,873 lines of theater Class II, TV, and IX 
excess materiel during FY94. To capture the ERFs redistribution efforts during the year, it retrograded to 
CONUS more than $338.83M worth of materiel. Additionally, it redistributed amounts of materiel exceeding 
$344.99M within the European theater. 

To help the National Inventory Control Points (NICP), ERF has effectively stopped all retrograde of excess 
materiel out of US AREUR. The result will be a transportation cost avoidance by storing/disposing of materiel 
in US AREUR. These changes will be ready for testing by the end of calendar year 1994. 

German Federal Labor Court Ruling 

German Federal Labor Court has been examining Ogden Allied Services GmbH's taking over the ERF 
contract. On 14 July 1994, it ruled that paragraph 613a of the German Civil Code applied to it. This law 
required Ogden to take over all of the employees who had been on the previous contractor's payroll. It also 
stipulated that the shop agreement at the time of the takeover applied to Ogden. Ogden was forced to offer 
reemployment to 31 employees whom they had not taken over from the previous contractor. They would back 
pay the employees retroactive to 1 October 1992. Ogden was liable for differences in bonus amounts for all 
employees currently on its payroll. 

Ongoing QA training ensures the high standards of quality for inspection of materiel and processes. All 
personnel continued to suggest improvements in the quality program to ensure the maintenance of high standards. 

New Mission 

During January 1994, both HQ, ERF, and ERF V added the mission of handling Class II and IV materiel. 
This included the receipt and processing of massive quantities of materiel. They fielded AMC-E disposition 
teams using laptop computers throughout Germany and the Netherlands. This saved ERF the transportation and 
handling costs from the deactivation of storage sites. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

The ERF also participated in the Prepo Afloat Project. On 13 December 1994, the first team was in place 
in Antwerp, Belgium. The supply expertise was in ADP entry, Ship Inventory Lists, Load Lists, TMCD 
comparison, and other related support. The project concluded at the end of March 1994. 

ERF continues to prove its value to the Army. It has enabled the Theater to identify excess and return 
millions of dollars in materiel for reutilization. Their efforts have saved the American Taxpayers millions and 
enhanced the readiness of Army forces worldwide. 

Status of Modification Work Order (M WO) Program 

AMC-Europe held the annual European MWO Coordinating / Scheduling Workshop at AMC-Europe 
Headquarters, Seckenheim, Germany, during 27-30 June 1994. Mr. Harro Zuest, AMC MWO program manager, 
was the workshop chairperson. Representatives attended from: HQ AMC; AMC commodity commands; AMC- 
Europe; the 200th Theater Army Materiel Management Center (TAMMC); and United States Army, Europe 
(USAREUR) units. AMC commodity command representatives presented their planned MWO applications for 
FY94/95. The workshop was a catalyst for the MWO program in Europe as it provided excellent information 
exchange for all attendees. Workshop attendees unanimously agreed that the workshop was very worthwhile and 
recommended another conference take place in June 1995. 

Materiel Fielding in Europe 

The Logistics Systems Directorate's Materiel Fielding Division provides the AMC corporate perspective to 
the European theater's materiel fielding process. It synchronizes several diverse activities involved in fielding 
to ensure the timely fielding of sustainable equipment systems. The Force Modernization Program, which 
introduces new systems with Total Package Fielding (TPF), declined slightly during FY94. USAREUR's 
database showed 1 56 TPF systems fielding or scheduled to field in the first month of FY94. That reached 1 59 
in February, dropped to 148 in March, reached 155 in August and dropped to 148 in September. Smaller 
quantities come to USAREUR now, because of the reduced troop strengths, but the number of systems remains 
mostly constant. Fifty-seven new systems started fielding to USAREUR in FY94, and 46 system fieldings were 
completed. USAEUR identified and added 40 new systems to the database. Turbulence again occurred 
throughout the year, reflecting continued troop reduction and reorganization, and reductions in the funding for 
modernization programs. USAEUR's database reflected 569 changes during the year. Most were shifts in the 
First Unit Equipped Date (FUED) from funding reductions in the TPF system fielding programs. 

Fielding Status Review (FSR) 

The FSR represents a monthly "snapshot" of the materiel fielding database. The Materiel Fielding Division 
action officers use the database to list Total Package Fielding (TPF) systems issued to USAREUR organizations. 
It is a management tool. Throughout the fielding process, the action officers record events and changes in the 
fielding process as they occur. They create the FSR midway through each month and send it to more than 100 
participants; each recipient is, in someway, involved in the process to field new equipment in Europe. The FSR 
presents an overview of the European fielding program, from the AMC-Europe point of view. It lists every 
system in the database, identifies any with a problem and summarizes each problem. It also identifies any new 
fieldings started since the last FSR. FSR lists system fieldings completed, systems canceled, systems newly 
added to the database and any changes that have occurred. FSR's purpose is to make available current fielding 
information and to encourage an information exchange with customers. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Central Staging in Europe 

Two staging sites exist: Friedrichsfeld Staging Activity (FSA) and Seckenheim Staging Activity (SS A). FS A 
is the larger facility and the primary site. SSA is smaller and configured to handle secure items. It primarily 
handles sensitive communications equipment. Both sites completed the year in excellent condition. The central 
staging sites issued some 38,000 items to USAREUR during FY94. The small, professional and dedicated staff 
put in 1943 hours of overtime to ensure they met the deadlines. Customers were billed $471,920 for services 
during FY94. 


Hammonds Barracks 

During February 1993, the Civilian Personnel Operations Center (CPOC) joined us as tenants of Hammonds 
Barracks. CPOC is the consolidation of USAREUR's Civilian Personnel Offices in the European theater. It will 
house all Official Personnel Files, do all classification actions, and conduct all recruitment actions throughout 
the European theater. When they complete the consolidation, the CPOC will employ approximately 270 

Another significant change took place at Hammonds Barracks. The German Southern Territorial Command 
(GSTC) transferred to Ulm, Germany. GSTC was on Loretto Kasem next to Hammonds Barracks. They have 
been our neighbors since the establishment of AMC-Europe. Through the years, they have catered many official 
and social functions for us. AMC-E will miss them and their hospitality. 

FY94 Manpower Data 

AMC-Europe's civilian Program Budget Guidance (PBG) authorizations increased by 30 spaces with the 
transfer of ERF, TPF and COMSEC missions. This brought the Command's total authorizations to 94. Budget 
and work year reductions reduced our PBG authorizations by 22 spaces to 72. They took 16 spaces from HQ 
AMC-Europe, two spaces from the TPF staff and four spaces from the ERF. The transfer of the ERF mission 
increased our military PBG authorizations increased by four to a total of seven. The elimination of spaces under 
the Conventional Forces Europe (CFE) treaty raised the onboard military strength above the authorized level. 
This was because of soldiers' Permanent Change of Station (PCS) dates extending into FY94. 

HQ AMC granted a blanket waiver to the AMC hiring freeze, allowing us to fill positions as they became 
vacant. However, due to the USAREUR civilian personnel system restructuring, AMC-E could not fill vacancies 
up to the funded level. In FY94, the average annual onboard civilian strength was 55, which equals 92 percent 
fill of our funded level. 

The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management) rescinded Defense Management Review 
Decision (DMRD) 980F. This called for the elimination of HQ AMC-Europe. However, HQ AMC-Europe's 
role had changed from liaison and logistics assistance to an operational Command with its own specific missions. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Conventional Forces Europe (CFE) 

HQ USAREUR set AMC-Europe's CFE ceiling at 50 under the CFE Treaty. This did not include Test, 
Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE). The USAREUR Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations 
(DCSOPS) allowed it to remain at or below 175 through FY96. The transfer of the Hythe Depot Activity, Hythe 
England from USAREUR to AMC transferred two CFE spaces to AMC. This transfer raised AMC's CFE ceiling 
to 52 as a result. Leghorn Army Depot's transfer from USAREUR to AMC will increase AMC's CFE ceiling 
to 82 for FY95. 

Status of Interservice Support Agreements 

During FY93, USAREUR Area Support Groups (ASGs) and Base Support Battalions (BSBs) requested base 
operation support (BASOPS) reimbursements from AMC-E. AMC-E rectified this by citing violations of 
provisions of AR 37-49. The USAREUR DCINC directed commanders to stop the requests. Since then, AMC-E 
has fostered a good working relationship with USAREUR Host Nations and plans to maintain it. 

As USAREUR and AMC revise the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between them, USAREUR Host 
Nations continue to request BASOPS reimbursement. Negotiations between parties are sometimes intense. 

They drafted a total of 41 new support agreements; revised 5 annexes to the umbrella MOU; and drafted 4 
Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) during the year. Agreement actions have increased by 78 percent 
compared with that of FY93. The increase in agreement actions is primarily the result of the new central staging 


Network Upgrade - Hammonds Barracks 

Hammonds Barracks's network consisted of Personal Computers (PCs) and dumb terminals (Wyse 75). 
Serial lines attached them to Intel 310 and 320 computers running Xenix. The Intel computers were connected 
using OpenNet software over Ethernet. Multichannel Memorandum Distribution Facility (MMDF) software 
provided E-mail to the entire network, operating as a sub-host on 

The new network PCs run Windows for Workgroups Version 3.11. They connect over Ethernet with Everex 
servers running Windows NT Advanced Server Version 3.1 . Windows-based Microsoft MSMail provides E- 
mail. Windows for Workgroups adds the ability to share files, printers, and disk space on the network. It also 
provides access to servers running the Windows NT Advance Server. Examples of services on the NT Servers 
are the following: E-mail, the AMC Europe Bulletin Board, backups for users' data files, and shared hard drive 
space. Windows for Workgroups also gives access to remote computers through Telnet or File Transfer Protocol 

DOIM let three separate contracts at the end of FY93: A services contract with AT&T for $162,839.56 to 
provide 2,004 man-hours to install the physical wiring and hardware for the new lOBaseT network. DOIM 
requested $268,046.00 of the Readiness Directorate at CECOM, Ft. Monmouth, by Military Interdepartmental 
Purchase Request (MIPR). The money purchased 3 Everex 486 Step Servers; 30 new 486 PC systems; 
peripheral upgrades for Zenith 486 PCs; all network hardware; and level 5 cables. DOIM let a contract worth 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

$57,198.00 to the Computer Store in Worms. It was for 10 laser printers and 30 each of: 245 Mb hard drives; 
17" SVGA color monitors; and DOS 6.2 upgrades. 

Installation of a new network by AT&T personnel commenced July and was completed in September FY94. 
In First Quarter FY95, DOIM will integrate 110 users in the network when they bring all Hammonds Barracks 
personnel on-line. 

Network Upgrade. DOIM 

In FY94, the E-mail systems for AMC-Europe changed. They went from two Unisys 5000 computers to one 
AT&T 3B2 computer and one Everex Step 486 computer. The Unisys 5000 systems had been the standard 
Electronic Mail Host for the Army for six years. However, their high maintenance costs drove the search for an 
alternative system. The Unisys 5000s also experienced connectivity degradation as USAREUR carried out 
network changes. The network software and hardware on the old systems could not keep up. Since both old and 
new systems use the Unix operating system, the transition to the new systems went smoothly. Users' logins and 
passwords stayed the same. Files from the old system were immediately available on the new. As a result, users 
saw little change in their environment after the transition. After solving connectivity problems with the new 
network and adding faster gateway-to-gateway circuits to Hammonds Barracks, E-mail should be faster. 
Maintenance cost savings of approximately $20K per year will pay for the new systems' second year of operation. 

Computer Software Conversion. DOIM 

DOIM, AMC-Europe, recently upgraded its computer network. The upgrade includes new hardware, 
operating system software and network software. Due to differences between the systems, application programs 
on the old network's file servers will not run on the new. DOIM must convert or rewrite the application programs 
in programming languages that are compatible with the new system. 

The new network will give more computing power to users by increasing the processing power of their 
personal computers (PC). It will put some applications from the file servers onto the desktop computers. For 
example, DOIM decided to convert the FoxBASE+ application to dBASE III+. They will install the program on 
a PC and the new network's file sharing capabilities to provide multiple user access. The conversion to dBASE 
III+ is complete, and network testing is continuing. 

AMC-Europe's Bulletin Board, an Informix application, has converted to the new network. It is accessible 
via Gopher. The file servers from the old network will phase out as DOIM converts the rest of the Informix 

Reutilization and Disposal of ADP Hardware and Software 

In December 1993, the HQ AMC-Europe, DOIM assumed the responsibility for identifying and classifying 
possible excess ADP hardware and software. DOIM reviewed the appropriate regulations and discussed the 
matter with the AMC-Europe Property Book Officer. The Property Book Officer is also the 5th Signal Command 
Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics (DCSLOG). In January 1994, they established a two-member team to inspect 
two storage facilities at Hammonds Barracks, Germany. Since then, they have identified more than 500 hardware 
end items for reutilization or disposal through appropriate logistical channels. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Equipment was classified according to standards provided by the 5th Signal Command, and entered into a 
database for status reporting. The team identified serviceable equipment that met AMC-Europe requirements 
and current architecture. They redistributed the equipment within the command or designated it a maintenance 
float to support anticipated equipment short falls. They identified equipment that did not meet the above criteria 
as excess to AMC-Europe requirements. More than 200 pieces of Automated Data Processing Equipment 
(ADPE) have been disposed of through the Property Disposal Office. 

Since January 1994, the team has identified more than 700 software packages for reutilization or disposal 
through appropriate logistical channels. During the inspection phase, all software was checked for completeness 
and serviceability, before classification. Still-current software returned to the supply office for redistribution 
within AMC-Europe. Outdated Software packages or those missing manuals or diskettes got disposed of through 
logistical channels. 

Computer Maintenance Supp ort 

TIER IJJ on-site computer repairs took place for all AMC-Europe & LAO-Europe activities. On-site repairs 
to 57 pieces of equipment saved AMC-Europe approximately $8900. Equipment repaired included printers, 
scanners, computers, and one copier. Additionally, computers and printers received many upgrades (memory, 
hard drives, floppy drives, and CPU). These would have resulted in additional charges, had the TIER III 
maintenance contractor installed them. 

Procurement of Digital Pagers 

During the Rwanda Relief Campaign, the AMC-E Commander needed a means of contacting essential 
personnel at a moment's notice. Because of the time constraints, it was vital that the communication equipment 
arrive in the shortest of time. DOIM had to get the best communication device that the AMC-E Commander 
could approve. The Digital Pager was the best device to accomplish this requirement. 

A PR&C was prepared and given to Contracting Command, Seckenheim, for ten digital pagers from a local 
distributor, DBP Telekom. Key personnel received pagers within five days of being tasked. 

Compact Disc-Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) Services 

An expanded CD-ROM service is now available for many items that had previously been only on paper or 
microfiche. This makes it much easier to find important supply data and other information. The United States 
Army Materiel Command (AMC) put all of its publications on CD-ROM. This data can now be readily found 
on a server by all users of the Local Area Network (LAN). DA Pamphlet 25-30, the official listing of Army 
Publications, is also on CD-ROM now. This allows users to look up publication data on a personal computer 
(PC) and answer inquiries much faster than before. Distribution services for CD-ROM versions of the Army 
Master Data File (AMDF) and related publications, previously on microfiche, are available. The new products' 
names are ARMYLOG and FEDLOG. They offer easy access to information that once required a cumbersome 
library of microfiche and a reader. Users' PCs can now scan this vital logistical data, eliminating the risk of 
misplacing microfiche or the chore of filing. CDROM technology has brought the publications service at 
AMC-Europe into the 21stCentury. 


Materiel Readiness 


Mail Room Expansion at Hammonds Barracks 

The Headquarters, United States Army Europe Civilian Personnel Operations Center (CPOC), moved to 
Hammonds Barracks in the summer of 1994. One hundred new postal customers arrived. A large amount of 
official mail began to arrive for CPOC. 

An idea was initiated to expand the mail room so that it could provide better service to all. The Director of 
Information Management, the Installation Coordinator, and the Heidelberg Civilian Engineers planned and 
coordinated the mail room expansion. They reviewed regulations to learn what they needed to do to use an 
adjacent room for storing accountable mail. After they agreed upon specifications, diagrams were drawn to depict 
where new doorways should be opened between the two rooms. Additionally, they decided the number of 
mailbox banks. Funding became available in early 1994. 

The Engineers plan to do the modification work toward the end of this calendar year. Because V Corps moved 
to Heidelberg from Frankfurt during 1994, projects to adapt to their arrival took priority over others. This caused 
a delay in getting the mail room expanded. CPOC provided an employee to help with the increased volume of 
mail. When the expansion project is completed, it will greatly enhance mail service at Hammonds Barracks. The 
expanded mail room will also allow for better service to any units who may move to this installation later. 


Su pport to Macedonia 

On 12 July 1993, Mr. Tony Cross went to Macedonia. He was the LSE representative to support the Berlin 
Brigade and Operation Able Sentry. This operation was a United Nations mission. They designed it to monitor 
the Macedonian border and ensure that the Bosnian conflict did not expand beyond it. Specifically, Mr. Cross 
worked with the U.S. and other U.N.-supported forces. He provided logistics assistance and a link for the Berlin 
Brigade to the wholesale supply system. 

In November 1993, Mr. Cross re-deployed to USAREUR and Mr. Bob Holley from 3ID replaced him. Mr. 
Holley helped in the Berlin Brigade mission transfer to a 3ID Task Force in January 1994. Bob Kea, who is also 
from 3ID, replaced Mr. Holley in March 1994 and worked in Macedonia until June. Mr. Ed Weeks from 21st 
TAACOM is currently the LSE for Macedonia. Mr. Tommy Thompson will replace him in November 1994. 

All LSEs have successfully integrated new 
technology from the Headquarters, AMC-FAST, into 
their Task Force Operations. AMXEU had very few, 
if any, "tough issues" concerning Macedonia. This is 
directly attributable to the quality of support provided 
by the LSEs assigned. 

LAO-E Planning for Contingency Operations 

LAO-Europe and LAO, 1 AD, developed an LSE 
equipment package from excess theater POMCUS 
assets. The package was for contingency support to 

Line Item Numbers (LINs) and Quantities 






Generator 30KW 






Truck, M8 18 



Camo Screens 

71 EA 


Instal Kit 

50 EA 


Camo Spt Sys 

142 E A 


Radio, VRC-47 

50 EA 


Light Set 



Radio Pwr Sup 



Tent, Maint 



HMMWV, M1026 

31 EA 


Trl, M101 



Trl, M105A2 


X4093 1 

Truck, Cgo, 5T 

1 EA 


Truck, Ml 09 



Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

the Former Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). HQ USAREUR Office of the DCSLOG reviewed the LAO-E 
equipment proposal. They requested DA approval to lend the equipment for an LSE temporarily. DA granted 
approval on 8 October 1993. 

Identified by HQ, Combat Equipment Group Europe (CEGE), the equipment initially went to six sites. At 
the request of AMC-Europe, all equipment was consolidated at CEC 3 (Karlsruhe). The Logistics Support 
Activity (LOGS A) provided funds ($10,000) to cover the CEGE costs for activation, transportation and 
configuration. By 2 November 1993, they had moved more than 95 percent of all equipment to CEC 3. 
Additionally, MICOM provided a Command and Control Van, with International Marine Satellite (INMARSAT) 
capability, at Seckenheim for Contingency Operations. They also provided training to 1 st Armored Division 
personnel in case of deployment. 

LAO-E Support to Humanitarian Relief effort in Rwanda 

In July 1 994 the United States committed to the humanitarian relief in Rwanda. European Command 
(EUCOM) had the responsibility for the Area of Operations. They established a USAEUR Task Force under the 
command of BG Nix, Commander SETAF. Also, they organized Task Force (TF) 5 1 from Germany, centered 
on the 51st Maintenance Battalion at Mannheim. General Nix requested AMC LSE support and AMC issued 
a deployment order. LTC Simonson was designated LSE Rwanda. AMC identified 14 personnel and submitted 
them for phase one deployment. BG Gerald from AMC deployed from Europe to Mombassa, and later to 
Intebbe, Kenya to evaluate AR3 stocks. Two logistics assistance personnel from Europe provided the only 
support that they required. Mr. Ray Monsour of ATCOM provided water purification support in Goma, Zaire, 
from 27 July until 1 7 August 1 994. Mr. Ken Bonzo of CECOM provided communication support in Mombassa, 
Kenya from 3-23 August. He also helped in evaluating the communication assets of the AR3 stocks. 


Since September 1993, AMC-E has been orchestrating "Operation LAPCAP" (Logistics Assistance Program, 
Cost Avoidance Plan). It developed to market the "value added" of the LARs, document savings to customers, 
and identify logistics issues for resolution. The program represents a "snapshot" of what the LARs were 
accomplishing for customers. It provides honest, evaluative data reported through the LAO. The Commander, 
AMC-E, receives an electronic report monthly. Verified cost avoidance (October 1993-September 1994) 
exceeded $4.5M. The success of LAPCAP has gained visibility with the senior leadership in Europe. It has 
become an agenda item at the monthly Readiness and Sustainability meetings. 


Realignment Support to USAREUR 

To ensure effective USAREUR support, ACALA placed Senior Staff Technical Representatives (SSTR) at 
both Division Support Commands (DISCOMs). These individuals will work the systemic long range issues. 
These involve coordination, investigation, and documentation of issues for long term solutions required from 
National Maintenance and Inventory Control Points. The placement of these individuals will eliminate tying up 
LARs on long range problems. LARs can then focus on diagnostics and training of using personnel. 


Materiel Readiness AMXEU 

Preparations for Deployment 

Mr. Don Dennis has continued to train all interested LSE-Europe individuals in small arms safety, 
self-defense, and marksmanship. He is a LAR from the U.S. Army Armament, Munitions, and Chemical 
Command (AMCCOM). He provided a total of 105 LSE-Europe personnel with in-depth training tailored to the 
Emergency Essential Civilian. The training went as follows: Range Safety/Weapon Handling and Safety 
Features - 1 Hour, Pistol Marksmanship Instruction with Familiarization/Practice Session - 1 Hour, Defensive 
Shooting Technique - 1 Hour; Self-Defense Scenarios with Qualification - 1 Hour. At the completion of the 
training each participant received a Sidearm Deployment Certification. 



Aberdeen Proving Ground, 4, 14, 22, 26-29, 33, 35, 36, 41, 42, 44, 45, 63, 76, 105, 1 1 1, 1 17, 1 18, 123, 196, 

Acquisition, 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-10, 13, 19, 25, 36, 39-41, 46-48, 52-56, 75, 83, 85, 87, 88, 95, 96, 1 12-116, 

121-128, 130-136, 141, 147, 148, 150, 151, 153-159, 162-172, 174-181, 186, 187, 189-195, 198, 203, 

205, 206, 224, 227-229, 237, 248 
Acquisition Excellence, 2, 8, 203 
Aerospace , 35, 130, 177, 189 

Air Force, 9, 17, 60, 73, 100, 103, 1 14, 130, 134, 136, 166, 173, 191, 194, 195, 224, 235 
AMC-Europe, 41, 182, 236-238, 240-245, 248 
American, British, Canadian and Australian (ABC A), 182, 198 
Ammunition, 6, 7, 10, 13, 18, 20, 26, 28, 31, 42, 47, 50, 58, 61, 69, 78-80, 90, 104, 105, 118, 140-148, 162, 

178, 182, 184, 185, 204, 210, 223-225, 232, 233 
Antwerp, Belgium, 240, 242 
Armaments, 19, 28, 46, 72, 74, 105, 109, 136, 143, 146-148, 152, 196, 198, 201, 204, 205, 229, 237, 248, 

Armaments Research, Development & Engineering Center (ARDEC), 13, 74, 90, 1 14, 122, 123, 129, 148, 

152,165, 185,201 
Army Ammunition Plants, 28, 30-33, 36, 42, 50, 1 18, 146, 147 
Army Staff, 9, 23, 1 18, 187, 198, 209 
Arsenals, 26-30, 32, 33, 36, 41, 42, 44, 45, 50, 61, 63, 65, 67, 68, 72, 74, 81, 82, 88, 105, 109, 110, 118, 

122, 123, 165, 171,209,238 
Artillery, 3, 130, 148,210 

Association of the United States Army (AUSA), 1, 125, 180, 181 
Atlanta XX Conference, 69, 78, 88, 133, 169, 170 
Automatic Identification Technology (AIT), 184, 185, 223 
Aviation, 3, 41, 42, 102, 103, 105, 106, 136, 156, 158, 176, 177, 194, 201, 203, 208, 210, 211, 213, 217, 

220, 223, 237 
Awards, 9, 17, 22, 23, 25, 31, 33, 44, 45, 50, 51, 59-61, 65, 90, 103, 105, 124, 126, 132, 136, 137, 139, 

152, 160, 161, 163, 169, 170, 174, 194, 215, 234 
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission, 9, 13, 21, 24-27, 32, 35, 36, 40, 47, 68, 78, 79, 106, 

107, 141, 152, 170, 185, 215, 216, 220, 231 
Battle Labs, 128, 181, 183, 186-188, 199, 200 
Berlin Brigade, 247 
Bosnia, 2, 11,21,23,200,212 
Britain, 182, 198-200 
Budget, 3, 4, 10, 15-21, 23, 25-31, 34, 37-39, 46-48, 51, 55-57, 62, 67, 70, 71, 74, 76, 78, 81, 82, 94, 96, 

99, 110, 124, 126, 134, 140-146, 152-155, 157, 158, 162, 165, 166, 170, 172, 175-177, 179, 180, 185, 

187, 188, 194, 197, 205, 206, 210, 214-217, 220-222, 226, 227, 229, 230, 233, 237, 242, 243, 247 
Business, 7-9, 15, 16, 19-21, 24, 30, 38, 41, 42, 46, 62, 71, 72, 76, 77, 90, 91, 96, 121, 122, 132-134, 137, 

143, 145, 150, 151, 153, 162, 172, 173, 175-181, 214, 226-228, 230, 231, 234 
Canada, 169, 182, 190, 197-200, 205 
CD-ROM, 115 
Chaplain, 83, 84 
Chemical-Biological, 14, 19,24,26-28,32,43,47,50,60,76,82, 102, 103, 105, 107-109, 111, 112, 114, 

115, 136, 143, 160, 163, 164, 174, 175, 178, 191-193, 195,203,210,211,214,224,229,237,248, 


Chief of Staff, Army, 140, 144 
Chief Scientist, 7, 14 
Child Care, 24, 30, 31,65, 120 
Clinton, President Bill, 1 1, 26, 27, 38, 152 
Coburn, LTG John G., 7, 90, 123, 152, 197, 201, 232 
Combat Systems, 42, 196 

Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM), 79, 183, 213, 223, 224 
Commodities, 46, 67, 127, 201, 217, 221, 242 
Communication, 10, 13, 14, 22, 41, 42, 51, 68, 70-72, 76-78, 82, 85, 91, 92, 106-108, 116, 132, 138, 153, 

158, 162, 165, 168, 175, 177, 178, 181, 182, 184, 188, 195, 196, 201-204, 219, 220, 223, 224, 226, 

229, 230, 236, 239, 240, 243, 246, 248 
Computers, 1-4, 22, 26, 31, 54, 64, 67, 70, 73, 74, 76, 77, 87, 88, 99, 117, 161, 167, 168, 171, 174, 175, 

178, 182, 202, 205, 209, 226, 228, 241, 244-246 
Congress, 15, 22, 23, 26, 27, 39, 68, 89, 90, 98, 111, 112, 118, 140, 142, 145-147, 152, 162, 164, 171, 179, 

180, 195, 196, 217, 219, 227, 232, 233 
Construction, 4, 9, 19, 24-27, 29, 31, 35, 62, 65, 157, 158, 161, 185, 233 
Contracting, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 23, 24, 33, 34, 46, 63, 65, 73-76, 80, 85, 88, 89, 96, 98, 99, 105, 121, 

123-127, 129, 132-137, 139, 141, 146, 147, 153, 156, 159-167, 169, 171, 172, 175-177, 181, 189, 195, 

196, 205, 206, 21 1-213, 215, 217-220, 224, 226, 228, 234, 241, 244, 246 
Core Competencies, 2, 1 1, 203, 204 
COSCOM, 12,80,237 

Demilitarization, 26, 27, 43, 50, 79, 96, 118, 141, 142, 145, 146, 201, 218, 225 
Depleted Uranium, 106, 117-119, 148 
Depots, 5, 6, 12, 13, 15, 17-21, 26-30, 40-47, 50, 51, 58, 60, 61, 63, 67, 73, 74, 78-83, 87, 89, 90, 98-100, 

105-107, 110, 112, 118, 143, 144, 146, 156, 170, 172, 173, 179, 192, 194-196,207,208,213-223, 

225-227, 231, 236, 238-241, 244 
Desert Shield/Storm, 3, 4, 10-12, 18-21,26,55, 101, 111, 112, 127, 133, 138, 143, 153, 154, 158, 164-166, 

173, 178, 180, 184, 185, 188, 195, 198, 200, 205, 206, 214-216, 223, 226, 227, 230, 232, 233 
Digitization, 3, 4, 71, 76, 88, 181, 188, 189 
Disaster Relief, 1 53 
Distribution, 7, 9, 13, 18, 27, 34, 40, 42, 44, 45, 48, 59, 61, 70-73, 112, 116, 118, 134, 144-146, 150, 155, 

156, 159, 160, 162, 165, 182-184, 186, 187, 192, 197, 208, 213, 218, 223, 240, 244, 246 
Dominican Republic, 213 
Downsizing, 16, 23, 24, 31, 43, 59, 70, 72, 94, 105, 1 13, 137, 143, 150, 170, 198, 211, 213, 215, 216, 219, 

228, 237 
Education, 8, 9, 34, 39, 47, 58, 62, 64, 67, 68, 71, 95, 96, 131, 168, 186, 189, 205, 206 
Electronics, 1, 3, 4, 14, 22, 27, 42, 44, 68, 69, 71-73, 78, 82, 85, 87, 88, 101, 105-108, 125, 126, 128, 132, 

158, 166, 168, 169, 173, 175, 177, 180, 196, 201, 202, 204, 219, 223, 226, 231, 236, 239, 245, 248 
Energy, 24, 25, 30, 31, 48, 1 14, 1 15, 205 
Engineering, 2, 7-9, 12, 14, 15, 19, 24-26, 28, 30, 31, 39-41, 46, 47, 50, 55, 58, 67-69, 71, 74, 79-81, 87, 

88,91,95,99, 103, 107, 109, 113, 114, 117, 125-127, 129, 134, 143, 148, 150-152, 154-160, 162, 

163, 165-169, 171-173, 175, 178, 179, 185, 187, 190, 194, 199,201-205,210,211,222,232,234, 

235, 247 
Environment, 3, 6, 14, 24-26, 28, 29, 31-40, 52, 53, 67, 70, 76, 80, 81, 86, 87, 91, 103, 107, 109, 1 1 1-114, 

116-118, 120, 124, 127, 137, 140, 142, 145, 146, 159, 160, 162, 168, 169, 175, 178-180, 182, 

189-191, 193-195, 217, 226, 231, 241, 245 
Equal Opportunity, 91, 92, 97 


Equipment, 2, 6, 7, 18-20, 24, 25, 41-44, 46-48, 53, 55, 70, 73-75, 78-82, 87, 102, 107, 108, 112, 114, 115, 

122, 129, 130, 144, 147, 154, 156-163, 171, 180, 183, 185, 188, 200, 202, 208-210, 212, 213, 215, 

218, 220-223, 226, 228, 233, 236, 241-244, 246-248 
Europe, 41, 48, 59, 141, 143, 168, 182, 185, 207, 208, 212, 213, 236-249 
Exercises, 13, 50, 78-81, 119, 123, 153, 181-184, 198, 212, 213, 239 
Explosives, 26, 32, 102-105, 108, 141, 142, 144, 145, 148 
Families, 1 1, 24, 25, 29, 30, 52, 57, 60-65, 95, 120, 122, 149, 155, 162, 210, 223 
Finance, 17, 22, 62, 95, 146, 153, 217, 225 

Fires, 3, 24, 31, 48, 100, 103, 118, 159, 164, 192, 193, 195, 196, 224 
Firing Ranges, 32, 118 

Food, 25, 26, 41, 43, 45, 48, 55, 63, 154, 213 
Force XXI, 181, 184, 188 
Foreign Military Sales, 100, 132, 137, 194 
FORSCOM, 13, 63, 208, 212, 239 
Forts, 11-13, 18, 26, 27, 30, 33, 36, 41, 42, 45, 48, 57, 58, 61-65, 68, 73, 81, 83, 91, 106, 107, 121-123, 

125, 128, 151, 156, 157, 162, 163, 195, 199, 211, 213, 214, 219, 226, 231, 238 
France, 197-204 

Germany, 175, 181, 185, 195, 197, 199-201, 205, 208, 209, 219, 223, 237, 241-243, 245, 248 
Gore, Vice President Al, 92, 197 
Guns, 147, 192,200,201,214 
Haiti, 11, 12, 21, 23, 51, 59, 143, 163, 212, 213, 230 
Health, 10,29,34,61,95, 102, 103, 106-116, 118, 120, 140, 178, 192 
Helicopters, 1, 3, 5, 10, 105, 158, 166, 177, 178, 195, 201-203, 205, 210, 213 
Housing, 24, 25, 29, 30, 40, 61 
Industry, 3-5, 8, 10, 11, 13,20,27,28,38,60,71,74,83,88, 109, 110, 112, 113, 123, 124, 126, 132-134, 

136, 138, 140, 141, 145, 150, 151, 154, 156, 158, 161, 165, 166, 168-170, 174-181, 188-191, 196, 

199, 200, 204, 210, 214, 217, 223, 224, 226 
Information, 1, 3-5, 7, 9, 15, 16, 18-20, 22, 24, 30, 31, 36, 38, 46, 48, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 60, 62, 66-78, 

83-85,87-91,94-96,98,99, 102, 105, 107-109, 111, 112, 114-117, 121, 124, 125, 129, 132-134, 138, 

140, 141, 150, 153-155, 157, 167, 169, 171-173, 180-183, 186, 188-192, 197, 199, 204, 207, 212, 

215-217, 219, 220, 226, 230, 232-234, 236-238, 242, 244, 246, 247 
Installations, 4, 6, 8, 10, 17, 19, 22, 24-47, 50, 61-65, 68, 71, 73-76, 78, 79, 81, 82, 85, 95, 96, 100, 104, 

106, 107, 109-112, 118, 120, 125, 133, 140, 144-147, 152, 153, 160, 161, 163, 164, 173, 175, 176, 

182, 185, 189, 191, 194, 195, 205, 208, 209, 215-220, 223, 226, 233, 236, 238, 240, 241, 243-245, 247 
Interns, 8, 9, 12, 15, 50, 58, 63, 69, 91, 102, 106 
Interoperability, 163, 199-202, 204 
Joint Services, 5, 9, 11-13, 15,21,50,67,74,76,81,84,87,88, 102, 107,115,122, 127, 128,136, 146, 

154, 156, 163, 166, 167, 171-173, 175, 178, 179, 181-185, 188-190, 192, 195, 202-204, 210, 213, 214, 

216-218, 220, 222, 226, 228, 230-232, 235 
Kenya, 85, 213, 236, 248 

Korea, 2, 59, 75, 160, 170, 183, 184, 200, 209, 219, 223, 230 
Kuwait, 1 1, 23, 143, 157, 208, 213 
Laboratories, 2-4, 8, 9, 11, 14, 26-30, 33, 36, 41, 54, 55, 76, 114, 117, 127, 128, 152, 161, 170, 174, 179, 

181, 183, 185-188, 196, 198-200, 203 
Logistics, 1,2, 5-7, 1 1-14, 17, 18, 24-26, 39-41, 43, 45-47, 51, 58, 67, 71, 74-76, 78, 79, 83, 84, 87, 88, 

124, 129, 136, 137, 139-141, 143, 145, 153, 154, 157, 159, 162, 166, 167, 170-173, 178, 182-185, 

189, 190, 192, 195, 200, 204, 207-210, 212, 213, 215-218, 220-233, 235-238, 240-243, 245-248 
Logistics Power Projection, 2, 1 1, 143, 144, 159, 204, 230 


Louisiana Maneuvers (LAM), 13, 14, 36, 50, 147, 180-184, 187, 188 

Macedonia, 11,212,247 

MACOMs, 10, 29, 30, 41, 51, 57, 58, 62, 65, 66, 70, 71, 73, 74, 104, 123, 128, 144, 162, 186, 188, 197, 

208, 219, 226, 229, 239 
Maintenance, 5, 6, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24, 25, 27, 29, 31, 35, 40-42, 44-48, 70, 74, 75, 78-82, 89, 

98-100, 112, 115, 126, 128, 129, 140-144, 146, 147, 152, 156, 157, 164, 170, 172, 175, 194, 195, 207, 

21 1, 214-222, 226, 238, 241, 245, 246, 248 
Major Subordinate Commands (MSCs), 8, 16, 40, 44, 51, 55, 59, 61, 65, 66, 74, 76, 90, 91, 103, 125, 134, 

135, 140, 155, 165-167, 169, 172, 177, 190, 204, 211, 216-218, 222, 236 
Major Subordinate Commands, AMCCOM, 17, 19, 20, 47, 87, 90, 109, 117, 122, 143-145, 173, 210, 

214-216, 218, 221, 222, 224, 249 
Major Subordinate Commands, ARL, 2-4, 8, 9, 1 1, 14, 30, 31, 33, 36, 41, 42, 69, 90, 1 13, 128, 131, 157, 

174, 180, 185-187, 196, 199, 203 
Major Subordinate Commands, ATCOM, 42, 45, 48, 55, 71, 90, 123, 129, 155, 173, 177, 195, 201, 205, 

208, 210, 213-216, 218, 221, 222, 225, 231, 237, 248 
Major Subordinate Commands, CBDCOM, 14, 50, 60, 94, 101, 105, 123, 136, 163, 210, 21 1 
Major Subordinate Commands, CECOM, 14, 22, 41, 42, 51, 56, 62, 71, 72, 90, 105-107, 122, 123, 129, 

132, 153, 155, 173, 177, 179-181, 195, 201, 202, 204, 205, 210, 214-216, 218, 219, 221-223, 229, 

236, 237, 239, 244, 248 
Major Subordinate Commands, DESCOM, 19, 22, 26, 40, 43, 45, 60, 73, 75, 83, 90, 144, 172, 173, 208, 

Major Subordinate Commands, IOC, 74, 123, 145, 171, 217 
Major Subordinate Commands, MICOM, 14, 41, 50, 56, 74, 122-124, 130, 136, 169, 171, 173, 202, 204, 

205, 210, 214-216, 218, 220-222, 236-238, 248 
Major Subordinate Commands, STRICOM, 10, 41, 54, 87, 94, 123, 164, 165, 185, 187, 235 
Major Subordinate Commands, TACOM, 30, 31, 42, 43, 71, 74, 75, 80, 87, 90, 122, 123, 129, 130, 156, 

173, 177, 185, 196, 202, 205, 210, 214-216, 218, 221, 222, 224, 225, 238, 239 
Major Subordinate Commands, TECOM, 42, 51, 74, 105, 112, 113, 123, 136, 181, 201, 221 
Major Subordinate Commands, US AS AC, 90, 94, 122, 137 
Marine Corps, 60, 83, 106, 1 14, 195, 196, 235 
Medicine, 34, 107, 109-111, 113, 114, 116, 120, 192 
Military Traffic Management Command, 79, 145, 207, 213 
Mines, 148, 149, 157, 163, 177, 202 
Missiles, 79, 147, 188,214 
Mobility, 2, 5, 18, 24, 26-28, 47, 75, 78, 79, 83, 144, 149, 154, 159, 161-163, 177, 201, 202, 208, 210, 222, 

Modeling, 8, 9, 54, 70, 71, 77, 91, 125, 126, 129, 189, 203 
Modernization, 70, 77, 136, 140, 159, 170, 177, 178, 192, 210, 216, 226, 242 
Munitions, 1, 3, 6, 19, 26, 28, 104, 105, 109, 143-145, 147, 148, 201, 204, 249 
National Guard, 63, 73, 78, 79, 81, 132, 135, 136, 157, 158, 191, 196, 209, 227, 239, 241 
Navy, 9, 17, 26, 27, 53, 60, 100, 103, 114, 130, 134, 174, 191, 195, 196, 220, 235, 239 
Netherlands, 200, 241 
Operations, 3, 11, 12, 16-18,20,73,78,81,85,95, 112, 115, 133, 135, 138, 140, 141, 143, 160, 162, 172, 

173, 184, 185, 198, 200, 208, 21 1, 213, 229, 236, 244, 245, 247, 248 
Panama, 92,213, 219 
Peacekeeping, 2, 197, 198, 200, 212 
Personnel, 5, 7, 1 1, 14-16, 18, 21-24, 32, 33, 35, 40, 44, 45, 47, 48, 51, 53, 55-62, 64, 66, 69, 70, 72-74, 76, 


78, 80, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89-91, 94-99, 101-103, 105-1 12, 115, 1 16, 119-121, 127, 129, 131, 133-135, 

137, 139, 140, 144, 145, 148-152, 155-157, 163, 169, 171, 174, 178, 179, 190, 191, 196, 197, 

205-207, 210-213, 215, 217, 219, 223, 224, 232, 234, 236-238, 240, 241, 243, 245-249 
Pollution, 25, 26, 34-39, 151, 174, 175, 189-194, 224 
Prepo Afloat, 2, 6, 239, 240, 242 
Procurement, 8, 1 1, 33, 76, 85, 87, 95, 96, 121, 124-126, 130, 134, 135, 137, 140, 143, 153-155, 157, 158, 

161-163, 165, 175, 189, 194, 196, 215, 224, 226, 228, 233, 234, 246 
Production, 3, 9, 17, 19, 32, 35, 36, 52, 53, 70, 71, 87, 88, 1 18, 126, 129, 133, 138, 140, 144, 146-149, 154, 

156, 159-164, 175-180, 187, 189, 191-194, 196, 216, 218, 219, 222, 224, 231-233 
Programs, 3-5, 7-23, 25-27, 29-39, 41-47, 49-62, 64-66, 68-71, 73-78, 81-86, 88, 90-92, 94-107, 109-1 17, 

119, 122, 126-138, 140-148, 150-160, 162-165, 167, 169, 171-174, 176-181, 183, 186-192, 194, 195, 

197-201, 203-212, 215-222, 224-229, 231-234, 236, 239-243, 245, 248 
Property, 24, 25, 28, 29, 39-41, 43, 46, 47, 69, 85, 102, 103, 139, 229, 236, 245, 246 
Proving Grounds, 4, 22, 26-30, 33, 35, 36, 41, 42, 45, 50, 61, 63, 68, 104, 105, 1 1 1, 1 17, 1 18, 123, 127, 

128, 196,213 
Quality, 4, 24, 25, 27-29, 32, 34, 56, 58, 61, 64, 65, 84, 85, 91, 95, 96, 1 1 1, 1 12, 114, 129, 135, 137-139, 

147, 161, 165-167, 222, 232, 233, 241, 247 
Quartermaster, 44, 80, 114 
Radiation, 102, 103, 109, 111, 115, 117, 119 
Radon, 35 
Railroad, 31 
Readiness , 5, 28, 31, 75, 79, 82, 94, 111, 140, 143, 146, 155, 157, 165, 184, 185, 207-211, 215, 216, 218, 

221, 222, 225, 227, 230, 240, 242, 244, 248 
Real Estate, 24, 25, 31, 35, 39 
Repair, 21, 29, 31, 40, 41,43,48,65,78,79,82, 100, 105, 106, 115, 145, 152,214-216,218,220,227, 

228, 246 
Research and Development, 2-5, 8-1 1, 13, 14, 19, 26, 28, 30, 31, 33, 35, 41, 46, 53-55, 62, 63, 68, 69, 74, 

87,91, 105, 107, 110, 112, 114, 116, 118, 123, 125, 127-131, 134, 136, 137, 141, 142, 148, 150-152, 

154, 157, 159, 163, 164, 166, 170, 174, 176, 179, 180, 185-187, 190, 191, 195-205, 222, 226, 234 
Reserve, 2, 5, 6, 11,18,57,59,60,75,78-82,91, 141-144, 147, 157, 158, 164,203,207,209,210,213, 

221, 223-225, 227, 229, 236, 240 
Reserves, 1 1, 18, 144, 207, 208, 210 
Retrograde, 143, 185, 221, 225, 227, 231, 239, 241 
RIF,57,90, 150 

Roadshow, 10, 122-124, 126, 167 
Robotics, 202, 203 

Ross, GEN Jimmy D., 1,9, 67, 79, 90, 98, 1 10, 174 
Rwanda, 1 1, 21, 23, 51, 85, 1 1 1, 208, 213, 236, 246, 248 
Safety, 1,29,31,64,70,80, 102-108, 110, 112-116, 118, 141, 142, 144, 145, 149, 161, 163, 165, 169, 

177, 193,194,211,223,249 
Salomon, GEN Leon E, 1, 89, 90, 98, 102, 103, 1 10, 169, 181 
Sanitation, 109 

Satellites, 1,10, 26, 39, 67, 153, 178, 184, 185, 248 
Saudi Arabia, 94, 132, 135-137, 208 
Schools, 4, 8, 9, 12, 35, 39, 44, 47, 58, 61, 64, 65, 69-73, 78, 82, 83, 90, 99, 1 14, 127, 131, 134, 151, 157, 

158, 183, 190, 203, 205, 206, 234, 238, 239 
Science, 7, 9, 34, 53, 109, 117, 151, 176, 178-180, 185-188, 199 
Scientists, 2, 3, 7, 9, 14, 1 17, 199, 201, 203-205 


Simulation, 3, 5, 8-10, 26, 41, 54, 125-128, 136, 164, 182, 183, 188, 189, 202, 203, 205, 235 

Single Stock Fund, 5, 6, 1 1, 45, 47, 73, 226, 230 

Smoke, 105, 163 

Software, 8, 9, 16, 26, 46, 58, 62, 67, 73-76, 88, 125, 156, 167, 168, 173, 175, 181, 205, 215, 226, 241, 

Somalia, 11,23,51,59,212 
Southern Command, 239 
Soviet Union, Former, 54, 55, 1 1 1, 185, 197 

Standardization, 10, 105, 128, 154, 159, 160, 164, 174, 175, 197-200, 204, 211 
Supply , 1, 5, 6, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24, 25, 41, 43, 44, 46-48, 58, 70, 79-81, 100, 129, 141-143, 146, 

159, 160, 182, 210, 212, 215, 221-229, 235, 242, 246, 247 
Sustainment, 5, 6, 12, 13, 19, 53, 62, 75, 78, 81, 82, 116, 180, 182-184, 207, 211, 212, 219, 220, 230 
Sweden, 204 
Tanks, 3, 31, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 72, 74, 78, 80, 81, 112, 136, 144, 156, 159, 161, 164, 177, 194, 196, 202, 

212, 218, 239 
Technology, 2-4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 19, 24-26, 29, 31, 36, 41, 43, 49, 52-56, 61, 62, 66, 68, 69, 71, 75, 76, 

80,87,88, 103-105, 107, 108, 111, 113, 116-119, 123-126, 128, 129, 133, 134, 142, 144, 150, 151, 

154, 156, 159-163, 166, 168, 170-173, 176-181, 183-205, 216, 222-224, 228, 230, 236, 246-248 
Technology Generation, 2, 49, 54, 75, 104 
Testing, 2, 5, 7, 8, 10-12, 26-28, 35, 41, 42, 44-46, 49, 60, 62, 63, 73, 74, 76, 79, 88, 99, 105, 107, 112, 

113, 115, 117, 118, 124, 126-130, 132, 136, 144, 152, 159-161, 163, 164, 170-173, 176, 177, 181, 

192-194, 196, 198, 200-203, 209, 215, 218, 224, 230, 241, 244, 245 
TRADOC, 54, 78, 82, 113, 129, 133, 134, 164, 167, 170, 180, 181, 186-188, 198 
Training, 3, 5, 8-12, 16, 20, 22, 25, 31, 34, 35, 39, 41, 48, 50, 53, 55-59, 62-65, 67-69, 71, 73, 78-83, 87, 

88,90,91,94,95,97,98, 100, 101, 103, 106, 112, 116, 121-127, 129-131, 136, 137, 139, 143, 156, 

164, 167, 168, 172, 180, 182-185, 188-190, 198, 205, 206, 208, 209, 21 1, 218, 226, 235, 237, 241, 

248, 249 
Transportation, 17, 18, 79-81, 95, 141, 143, 145, 158, 193, 212, 213, 221, 225-227, 230, 241, 248 
United Kingdom, 175, 197, 200, 204, 205 
United Nations, 11, 148, 213, 247 
Value Engineering, 31, 169 

Visibility, 5, 12, 63, 81, 145, 155, 169, 182-185, 229, 230, 234, 248 
Voluntary Early Retirement Authority, 15, 17, 57, 89, 90, 94, 122, 141, 150 
Voluntary Separation Incentive Program, 15, 17, 23, 57, 89, 90, 94, 122, 150 
Warsaw Pact, 197 
Watercraft, 159, 196 
Weapons Systems, 2-6, 9, 10, 17, 26, 27, 52-55, 108, 1 12, 1 15, 125, 148, 156, 165, 177, 178, 180, 189, 

195, 200, 201, 203, 205, 208, 210, 215, 221, 222, 225, 249 
Workshops, 9, 20, 21, 28, 31, 33, 46-48, 56, 64, 72, 91, 117, 122, 124, 147, 165, 167, 189, 242 
World War II, 40 
Zaire, 11,213,248 




AA&E Arms, Ammunition and Explosives 

AAA Army Audit Agency 

AAC Army Acquisition Corps 

AADCOM Army Air Defense Command 

AAE Army Acquisition Executive 

AAESA Army Acquisition Executive Support Activity 

AAFARS Advanced Aviation Forward Area Refueling System 

AAIM Association of Automotive Industry Manufacturers 

AAME Army Award for Maintenance Excellence 

AAP Army Ammunition Plant 

AAPPSO Army Acquisition Pollution Prevention Support Office 

AAWG Army Armaments Working Group 

ABC Activity Based Cost 

ABCA American-British-Candian-Austrailian 

ABLE Acquisition by Leasing Equipment 

ABP Army's non-assault Bridging Program 

AC Active Component 

ACALA Armament and Chemical Acquisition and Logistics Activity 

ACAP Army Career Alumni Program 

ACAT Acquisition Category 

ACCES Army Civilian Career Evaluation System 

ACE Armored Combat Earthmover 

ACE Armored Combat Engineer 

ACOE Army Communities of Excellence 

ACR Armored Calvary Regiment 

ACS Army Community Service 

ACSMAT ACS for Materiel 

ACTD Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration 

ACTEDS Army Civilian Training, Education and Development System 

ACTS Army Compliance Tracking System 

ACV Armored Combat Vehicle 

AD Aviation Division 

AD Army Depot 

ADA Army Depot Activity 

ADCS Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff 

ADCS Automated Document Conversion System 

ADICP Assistant Deputy for International Cooperative Programs 

ADMRU Aviation Depot Maintenance Roundout Unit Program 

ADO Army Digitization Office 

ADP Automated Data Processing 

ADPA American Defense Preparedness Association 

ADPE Automatic Data Processing Equipment 

ADUSD Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 

ADUSD Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 

AEC Army Education Centers 

AEC Army Environmental Center 

AEHA Army Environmental Hygiene Agency 

AEPI Army Environmental Policy Institute 


AERC Acquisition Executive Review Council 

AFAP Army Family Action Plan 

AFARS Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

AFAS Advanced Field Artillery System 

AFB Air Force Base 

AFCB Armed Forces Chaplain's Board 

AFH Army Family Housing 

AFIT U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology 

AFMA Army Fuze Management Agency 

AFMIS Army Food Management Information System 

AFRTS-BC Armed Forces Radio and Television Broadcast Center 

AFV Alternative Fuel Vehicles 

AGP Army Gateway Program 

AGS Armored Gun Systems 

ALA. Aerospace Industries Association 

ALEP Army Ideas for Excellence Program 

AIG Acting Inspector General 

AILP ARMS Initiative Implementation Plan 

AIMI Aviation Intensive Management 

ALP Army Implementation Plan 

ALPC Army Information Processing Centers 

ALRP Army Interference Resolution Program 

AIS Army Information Systems 

AIS Automated Information Systems 

AISC Army Information Service Center 

ATT Automatic Identification Technology 

AJPO Ada Joint Program Office 

ALAT Aviation Logistics Assistance Team 

ALMC Army Logistics Management College 

ALOC Air Line of Communication 

AMAS Army Materiel Accounting System 

AMC Army Materiel Command 

AMC-FE Army Materiel Command-Far East 

AMC-ID Army Materiel Command, Installation Division 

AMCAM Army Materiel Command, DCS for Ammunition 

AMCAQ Army Materiel Command, DCS for Acquisition 

AMCCOM U.S. Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command 

AMCEN Army Materiel Command, DCS for Engineering, Housing, Environment, and Installation Logistics 

AMCISS AMC Installation Supply System 

AMCR AMC Regulation 

AMCRD Army Materiel Command, DCS for Research, Development, and Engineering 

AMDF Army Master Data File 

AMEC Army Management Engineering College 

AMEDD Army Medical Department 

AMFB Acquisition Management Functional Board 

Ammo FAST-2 1 Ammunition Facil ity Strategy for the 2 1 st Century 

AMMOLOG Ammunition Logistics 

AMMOPAC Ammunition and Explosives Safety Policy Action Committee 

AMPMOD Army Materiel Command Plan Modernization 

AMR Acquisition Management Review 

AMSAA Army Materiel Systems Analysis Agency 

AMSDL Acquisition Management Systems Data Requirements Control List 


AMTAS Army Modernization Training Automation System 

ANAD Anniston Army Depot 

AOE Army of Excellence 

AOG Aircraft on Ground 

AORSE Aviation Operational Readiness and Standardization Evaluation 

APBI Advanced Planning Briefing to Industry 

APEX Abbreviated Professional Exchange 

APFSDS Armor Piercing, Fin Stabilized, Discarding Sabot 

APFT Army Physical Fitness Test 

APG Aberdeen Proving Ground 

APRAO Army Procurement Research and Analysis Office 

APU Auxiliary Power Unit 

AR Army Regulation 

AR2 Army War Reserves in Europe 

ARCENT-SA U.S Army Forces Central Command - Saudi Arabia 

ARDEC Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center 

ARDO Army Research and Development Organization 

ARFOR Army Forces 

ARI Aviation Restructure Initiative 

ARL U.S. Army Research Laboratory 

ARMS Army Readiness Management System 

ARMS Armament Retooling and Manufaturing Support 

ARMS Aviation Resource Management Surveys 

ARNG Army Reserve National Guard 

ARO Army Research Office 

ARP Army Reserve Package 

ARP Aircraft Retirement Program 

ARPA Advanced Research Planning Agency 

ARPS Army Readiness Package South 

ARPS Army Prepositioned Stock 

ARR Annual Recurring Requirement 

ARS Advanced Rocket System 

ARSTAF Army Staff 

ASA Assistant Secretary of the Army 

ASA(IL&E) Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Logistics, and Environment 

ASA(RDA) Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development and Acquisition 

ASAFM Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management 

ASARC Army System Acquisition Review Council 

ASB Army Science Board 

ASC Army Safety Center 

ASD(ES) Assistant Secretary of Defense, Economic Security 

ASD(P&L) Assistant Secretart of Defense, Personnel and Logistics 

ASDC3I Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence 

ASG Army Support Group 

ASGs Area Support Groups 

ASIMS Army Standard Information Management System 

ASMAG Army Spectrum Management Advisory Group 

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

ASMIS Army Safety Management Information System 

ASMP Army Strategic Mobility Program 

ASP Acquisition Systems Protection 

ASPP Acquisition Systems Protection Program 


ASSAT Army Specifications and Standards Action Team 

ASTAG Army Science and Technology Advisory Group 

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials 

ASTMP Army Science and Technology Master Plan 

ASTWG Army Science and Technology Working Group 

ATACMS Army Tactical Missile System 

ATAR Advanced Technology Assessment Report 

ATC Army Training Command 

ATCOM U.S. Army Aviation and Troop Command 

ATD Advanced Technology Demonstration 

ATD Advanced Technology Development 

ATLAS All-Terrain Lifter, Articulated System 

ATM Alpha Track Monitors 

ATMS Administrative Transport Management Survey 

ATR Automatic Target Recognition 

ATTU Atlantic Ocean to the Urals 

AUSA Association of the United States Army 

AVCRAD Aviation Classification Repair Activity Depot 

AVIM Aviation Intermediate Maintenance 

AVLB Armored Vehicle Launched Bridge 

AVRDEC Aviation Research and Development Center 

AVUM Aviation Unit Maintenance 

AWE Advanced Warfighting Experiments 

AWIS Army WWMCCS Information System 

AWMP Army Watercraft Master Plan • 

AWR Army War Reserve 

AWR- 1 Army War Reserve, Continental United States 

AWR-2 Army War Reserve, Europe 

AWR-3 Army War Reserve, Afloat 

AWR-4 Army War Reserve, Far East 

AWR-5 Army War Reserve, Southwest Asia 

AWS American Welding Society 


B&P Bid and Proposal 

BAA Broad Area Announcement 

BASEOPS Base Operations 

BAT Brilliant Anti-Armor Technology 

BCEF Business, Cost Estimating, and Financial 

BCIS Battlefield Combat Identification System 

BCM Business Clearance Memorandum 

BCR Business Clearance Review 

BCT BRAC Cleanup Teams 

BDP Battlefield Development Plans 

BDS-D Battlefield Distributed Simulation-Development 

BEC BRAC Environmental Coordinator 

BES Budget Estimate Submission 

BFV Bradley Fighting Vehicle 

BFVS Bradley Fighting Vehicle System 

BIDE Basic Identity 

BIDS Biological Integrated Detection System 

BIFF Battlefield Identification of Friend or Foe 

BIOPAC Biosafety Policy Action Committee 


BMAR Backlog of Maintenance and Repair 

BMP Best Manufacturing Practice 

BOD Board of Directors 

BOP Blast Overpressure 

BOS Battlefield Operating System 

BOSS Better Opportunities for Single Soldiers 

BP Business Plan 

BPG Business Process Group 

BPM Business Process Model 

BPM Business Process Manager 

BPM-LDM Business Process Management-Logistics Data Management 

BPRR Budget Program Resource Review 

BRAC Base Realignment and Closure 

BRDEC Belvoir Research, Development and Engineering Center 

BSB Base Support Battalion 

C-LOC Command-Logistics Operation Center 

C&A Contracting and Acquisition 

C2 Command and Control 

C3IC Command, Control, Communications and Information Systems 

C4 Command, Control, Communications, and Computer 

CAA Concepts Analysis Agency 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CAAS Contracted Advisory and Assistance Services 

CAC Combined Arms Center 

CAD Computer-Aided Design 

CAIG Cost Analysis Improvement Group 

CALS Computer-Aided Logistics Support 

CAM Chemical Agent Monitor 

CAM Central Asset Management 

CAO Command Ammunition Office 

CAS Cost Accounting Standards 

CASCOM Combined Arms Support Command 

CASHPAC Chemical Agent Safety and Health Policy Action Committee 

CASPER Crewman's Associate Support Program through Enhanced Reconfigurability 

CATT Combined Arms Tactical Trainer 

CAWCF Conventional Ammunition Working Capital Fund 

CAX Computer Assisted Exercise 

CBD Commerce Business Daily 

CBDA U.S. Army Chemical and Biological Defense Agency 

CBDCOM U.S. Army Chemical and Biological Defense Command 

CBE Command Budget Estimate 

CBP Corporate Business Plan 

CBS-X Continuing Balance System - Expanded 

CC Condition Code 

CCAD Corpus Christi Army Depot 

CCE Comercial Construction Equipment 

CCEP Comprehensive Clinical Evaluation Program 

CCRT Chaplain Crisis Response Team 

CCS Communications Control Systems 

CCS Contracted Consulting Services 

CCSLA CECOM Communications Security Logistics Activity 


CCTT Close Combat Tactical Trainer 

CD Counter-Drug 

CD-ROM Compact Disk-Read Only Memory 

CDA Central Design Activites 

CDC Child Development Center 

CDRL Contract Data Requirement List 

CDROM Compact Disc Read Only Memory 

CDS Child Development Services 

CE Construction Equipment 

CE Concurrent Engineering 

CE CAD Concurrent Engineering Computer- Aided Design 

CEAC Cost and Economic Analysis Center 

CECOM U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command 

CEE Corrective/Enhancement Engineering 

CEGE Combat Equipment Group Europe 

CEMPR Command Equipment Management Program Review 

CEO Chief Executive Officer 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 

CERP Commander's Emergency Response Plan 

CEU Continuing Education Unit 

CEV Combat Engineer Vehicle 

CFC Chlorofluorocarbons 

CFE Conventional Forces Europe 

CFIUS Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States 

CFO Chief Financial Officer 

CFT Contract Field Teams 

CG Commanding General 

CGSC Command and Staff College 

CHPPM U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine 

CID Commercial Item Description 

CIM Corporate Information Management 

CIMMC CECOM Intelligence Materiel Management Center 

CINC Commander-in-Charge 

CINCCENT CENTCOM Commander-in-Chief 

CIO Corporate Information Office 

CIOR Reserve Officer Joint Federation (French) 

CD 5 Combat Identification Panel 

CIS Command Information System 

CIS Contractor Information Service 

CIT Consumable Item Transfer 

CLArT Command Logistics Assistance and Inspection Team 

CLIP Configuration and Logistic Information Program 

CM Configuration Management 

CMIS Configuration Management Information System 

CMS Configuration Management System 

CNAD Conference of National Armaments Directors 

COE Corps of Engineers 

COEA Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis 

COMARFOR Commander Army Forces 

COMIS Care of Materiel in Storage 

COMSEC Communications Security 

COMSIS Care of Materiel in Storage 


















































Covert Night/Day Operations in Rotorcraft 

Contingency Operations 

Continental United States 

Chief Operating Officer 

Continuity of Operations Planning 

Contracting Officer Representative 

Care of Supplies in Storage 

Commercial Off-The-Shelf 

Corrosion Protection 

Contracting and Acquisition Career Program 

Engineer & Scientist Career Program Office 

Contractor Performance Certification Program 

Continuous Processlmprovement 

Components Parts List 

Capital Purchase, Minor Construction 

Civillian Personnel Office 

Civilian Personnel Operations Center 

Career Program Planning Board 

Contractor Profile System 

Command Post Exercise 

Cost Review Board 

Cooperative Research and Development Agreements 

Chemical Research Development and Engineering Center 

Computer Resource Life Cycle Management Plan 

Computer Resources Management 

Congressional Research Service 

Composite Service 

Chief Scientist 

Combat Support 

Chief of Staff, Army 

Computer Sciences Corporation 

Chemical Surety Inspection 

Command Supply Management Reviews 

Chemical Surety Program 

Chemical Service Response Force 

Customer Support Requirements List 

Combat Service Support 

Combat Support Systems 

Combat Service Support Training Simulation System 

Central State University 

Cased Tetescoped Ammunition 

Corps/Theater Automatic Data Processing Center II 

Central Tire Inflation System 

Commercial Utility Cargo Vehicles 

Common User Installation Transport Network 

Combat Vehicle Crewman 

Civilian Welfare Fund 


Depot Support Activity-Far East 

Department of the Army 

DA Civilians 

Department of the Army Inspector General 


DALO-RMI Department of the Army, DCS for Logistics, Director of Resource Management, Secondary Items 


DAMPL Department of the Army Master Priority List 

DAPAO DA Public Affairs Office 

DAPP DOD Acquisition Pilot Program 

DAR Defense Acquisition Regulation 

DASA(ESOH) Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Environmental Safety Occupational Health 

DASD Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 

DAT Direction des Armenments Terrestres (France) 

DAU Defense Acquisition University 

DAWIA Defense Acquisition Work Force Improvement Act 

DBDU Desert Battle Dress Uniform 

DBOF Defense Business Operations Fund 

DCAA Defense Contract Audit Agency 

DCAe Directions des Constructions Aeronautiques (France) 

DCG Deputy Commanding General 

DCGRDA Deputy Commanding General for Research, Development and Acquisition 

DCINC Deputy Commander-in-Chief 

DCMC Defense Contract Management Command 

DCS Deputy Chief of Staff 

DCSEN Deputy Chief of Staff, Engineering, Housing, Environment, & Installation Logistics 

DCSINT Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence 

DCSLOG Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics 

DCSOPS Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations 

DCSRDE Deputy Chief of Staff for Research, Development, and Engineering 

DCSRM Deputy Chief of Staff for Resource Management 

DDEP Defense Data Exchange Program 

DDMC Defense Depot Maintenance Council 

DDR&E Director of Defense Research and Engineering 

DDSP Defense Development Sharing Program 

DEA Data Exchange Annex/ Agreement 

DEH Director of Engineering and Housing 

DEIS Defense Energy Information System 

DEMIL Demilitarization 

DEMVAL Demonstration/Validation Phase 
DEPSECDEF Deputy Secretary of Defense 

DERA Defense Environmental Restoration Account 

DES Defense Execution System 

DESCOM U.S. Army Depot System Command 

DEUCE Deployable Universal Combat Earthmover 

DEW Directed Energy Weapon 

DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

DFAS Defense Finance and Accounting Service 

DGA Delegation Generale pour l'Armenment (France) 

DGQA Director General for Quality Assurance 

DIA Defense Intelligence Agency 

DID Data Item Descriptions 

DIPS Defense Information Printing Service 

DIS Distributed Interactive Simulation 

DISA Defense Information Systems Agency 

DISC4 Defense Information Sytems for Command, Control, Communications and Computers 

DISCOM Divisional Support Command 


DISE Distribution Illumination System Electrical 

DISN Distributed Interactive Simulation Network 

DLA Defense Logistics Agency 

DLR Depot Level Reparable 

DLS Directorate of Logistics Systems 

DLSC Defense Logistics Services Center 

DLST Depot Level Special Training 

DMO Directed Military Overstrength 

DMRD Defense Management Review Decision 

DMRPM Depot Maintenance Resource Predictive Model 

DOD Department of Defense 

DODAAC DOD Activity Address Code 

DODD Department of Defense Directive 

DODI Department of Defense Instruction 

DODIG Department of Defense Inspector General 

DODSASP DOD Small Arms Serialization Program 

DOIM Directorate of Information Management 

DOL Directorate of Logistics 

DPA Defense Production Act 

DP ACS DLA Pre-Award Contracting System 

DPAS Defense Property Accounting System 

DPAS Defense Priorities and Allocations System 

DPG Defense Planning Guidance 

DPI Data Processing Installation 

DPS Defense Printing Service 

DPW Directorate of Public Works 

DR REAL Desktop Resource for Real Property Management 

DRET Direction des Recherches, Etudes, et Techniques (France) 

DRIS Defese Regional Interservice Support 

DRMO Defense Reutilization Materiel Office 

DSL Document Summary Lists 

DSMC Defense Systems Management College 

DSOHO Designated Safety and Occupational Health Officer 

DSREDS Digital Storage and Retrieval of Engineering Data System 

DSS Direct Support System 

DSS Direct Supply Support 

DSS Distribution Standard System 

DTC Design to Cost 

DTIC Defense Technical Information Center 

DU Depleted Uranium 

DUSD(L) Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Logistics) 

DVD Direct Vendor Delivery 

E3 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects 

EA Economic Analysis 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EA-CTC Executive Agent, Chemical Treaty Compliance 

EAC Echelon Above Corps 

EAC Executive Advisory Committee 

EAFRG Economic Analysis Functional Review Group 

EAPS Engine Air Particle Separator 

EBMP Environmental Best Manufacturing Process 


EC Electronic Commerce 

ECAC Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center 

ECAP Environmental Compliance Achievement Program 

EC AS Environmental Compliance Assessment System 

ECC Educational Computer Corporation 

ECIP Energy Conservation Investment Program 

ECMA European Computer Manufacturers Association 

ECP Engineering Change Proposal 

EDES Executive Director for Explosives Safety 

EDI Electronic Data Interchange 

EDM Electrical Discharge Machining 

EDMICS Engineering Data Management Information Computer System 

EDMS Engineering Data Management Systems 

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity 

EFO European Field Office 

EHAP Environmental Health Assessment Program 

EIA Electronics Industry Association 

EIR Equipment Incident Report 

EIS Enterprise Information System 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EMAG Environmental Management Action Group 

EMP Electromagnetic Pulse 

EMP Equipment Management Programs 

EO Executive Order 

EPA Educational Partnership Agreements 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

EPG Electronic Proving Ground 

ERDEC Edge wood Research, Development, and Engineering Center 

ERF Equipment Redistribution Facility 

ERF European Redistribution Facility 

ERFS Extended Range Fuel System 

ERO Extended Range Ordnance 

ES Emergency Standard 

ESA Engineering Support Activities 

ESC Executive Steering Committee 

ESEP Engineers and Scientists Exchange Program 

ESG Executive Steering Group 

ESP Equipment Survey Program 

ESSS Esternal Stores Support System 

ETG Environmental Technologies Group 

EUCOM European Command 

EUSA Eighth United States Army 

F&A Finance and Accounting 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FAA Functional Area Assessment 

FAA Functional Area Analysis 

FAC Fiscal Action Code 

FAP Family Action Plan 

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation 

FAS Field Artillery Systems 

FASCAM Family of Scatterable Mines 





















































Field Assistance in Science and Technology 

Functional Coordinating Group 

Flexible Computer Integrated Manufacturing 

Functional Chiefs Representative 

Foreign Comparative Test 

Fire Control Unit 

Facilities Engineering/Energy Program Reviews 

Functional Economic Analysis 

Federal Employee Compensation Act 

Federal EmployeesLeave Sharing Amendments Act 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Facilities Engineering Technical Data Feeder Report 

Federal Facility Compliance Act 

Failure Factor Expert System 

Force Integration Master Planner 

Fully Mission Capable 

Foreign Military Sales 

Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles 

Swedish Materiel Command (Forsuarets Materiel Verk) 

Forces Command 

Force Projection Logistics Exercise 

Functional Requirements Managers 

Facility Reduction Program 

Former Republic of Yugoslavia 

Field Safety Activity 

Friedrichsfeld Staging Activity 

Federal Supply Class 

Federal Supply Class 

Fire Support Combined Arms Tactical Trainer 

Food Service Program Management Reviews 

Fielding Status Review 

Field Service Representative 

Functional Support Template 

Former Soviet Union 

File Transfer Protocol 

First Unit Equipped 

First Unit Equipped Date 

Functional Working Group 

Fiscal Year 


Logistics Officer 

General Accounting Office 

Government Bill of Lading 

General Dynamics Land System 

Government Furnished Equipment 

Government Furnished Materiel 

Gas Generator 

General Headquarters 

General Headquarters Exercise - FY94 

General Headquarters Exercise 

Government-Industry Data Exchange Program 

General Manager 



















































General Officer 

Government-Owned Contractor-Operated 

General Officer Review Council 

General Officer Steering Committee 

Gallons Per Hour 

Gallons Per Minute 

Global Positioning System 

General Schedule 

General Support 

General Services Administration 

General Support Center-Livorno, Italy 

General Support Maintenance Program 

German Southern Territorial Command 



House Appropriations Committee 

Hazardous Air Pollutants 

House Armed Services Committee 

Halon Alternatives R&D Steering Group 

Hazardous Waste Minimization 

Hazardous Waste Minimization/Pollution Prevention 

Historically Black Colleges and Universities 

Head of Contracting Activity 

Hazard Division 

Heavy Dry Support Bridge 

High Explosive Anti-Tank 

High Explosive Anti-Tank-Multi-Purpose-Tracer 

High Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck 

Health Hazard Assessment 

Health Hazard Assessment Report 

Headquarters and Headquarters Company 

Helpful Information TopicS 

Heavy Lift Prepo Ship 

High Level Radioactive Waste 

Hazardous Material Information System 

Handheld Metallic Mine Detector 

Hazardous Materiels Management Program 

High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle 

Head of Delegation 

Health Physicist 

wellness/Health Promotion Services 


Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command 

Headquarters, Department of the Army 

Human Research and Engineering Directorate 

Health Services Command 

Hub and Spoke Distribution Center 

Human Systems Integration 

Hazardous and Toxic Substance Control Module 

High Volume, Low Pressure 



I&S Interchangeability and Substitutability 

I&SA Installations and Services Activity 

IA International Agreement 

IAE International Acquisition Education 

IAG Interagency Agreement 

IAP Installation Action Plans 

IASMP Integrated Ammunition Stockpile Management Plan 

IBP Ion Beam Processing 

ICAM Improved Chemical Agent Monitor 

ICBT Improved Common Bridge Transporter 

ICE Independent Cost Estimate 

ICP International Cooperative Program 

ICP Inventory Control Point 

ICPA International Cooperative Program Activity 

IC Installation Commander 

ID Infantry Division 

IDA Installation Decision Architecture 

IDEF Integrated Definition 

IDS Intrusion Detection Systems 

IEA Industrial Engineering Activity 

IEA Information Exchange Annex 

IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers 

IEMS Installation Equipment Management System 

IEW Intelligence and Electronic Warfare 

IEW Intelligence and Electronic Warfare 

IEWSS Intelligence Electronic Warfare Sustainment Streamlining Study 

IEWSS Intelligence Electronic Warfare Sustainment Streamlining Study 

IFS-M Integrated Facilities Systems-Mini/Macro 

IG Inspector General 

IGA Ing6nieur Generale de l'Armement (France) 

IGES Initial Graphics Exchange Specifications 

IH Industrial Hygiene 

IMA Individual Mobilization Augmentation/ Augmentees 

IMA Information Mission Area 

IMA Intelligence Materiel Activity 

IMC Information Management Council 

IMIP Industrial Modernization Incentives Program 

IMMC Intelligence Materiel Management Center 

IMWRF Installation Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Fund 

INF Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces 

INFOFLOW Information Flow 

INMARSAT International Maritime Satellite 

INSCOM Intelligence and Security Command 

IOC U.S. Army Industrial Operations Command 

IOC Initial Operational Capacity 

IOT&E Initial Operational Testing and Evaluation 

IP Implementation Plans 

IPDE Integrated Product Data Environment 

IPG Issue Priority Group 

IPO Industrial Preparedness Operations 

IPPD Integrated Product and Process Development 


IPPM Integrated Product and Process Management 

IPR In-Process Review 

IPR Intellectual Property Rights 

IPS Integrated Procurement System 

IR&D Independent Research and Development 

IRAC Internal Review and Audit Compliance 

IRBT Improved Ribbon Bridge Transporter 

IRPRS Integrated Requirements and Purchase Request System 

IS Industrial Specialist 

ISA Interservice Support Agreement 

ISC Information Systems Command 

ISDN Integrated Services Digital Network 

ISL Installation Sequence List 

ISM Integrated Sustainment Maintenance 

ISM Installation Support Modules 

ISR Installation Status Report 

ISSA Interservice Support Agreement 

ITO Installation Transportation Office 

ITOMOD Installation Transportation Office Modernization 

ITTS Instrumentation, Targets and Threat Simulators 

ITV In-Transit Visibility 




























Justification and Approval 

Joint Army/Industry Warranty Working Group 

Japan Armament Study Team 

Joint Computer- Aided Acquisition and Logistics Support 

Joint Chiefs of Staff 

Joint Coordination Task Group on DEMIL 

Joint Directors of Laboratories 

Joint Engineering Data Management Information and Control System 

Joint Electronic Warfare Center 

Joint Functional Requirements Determination Team 

Joint Group on Logistics Readiness 

Joint Logistics Commanders 

Joint Logistics Commands 

Joint Logistics Services Center 

Joint Logistics Systems Center 

Joint Logistics Support Command 

Joint Policy Coordinating Group 

Joint Policy Coordinating Group on Computer Resources Management 

Jefferson Proving Ground 

Joint Spectrum Center 

Joint Service Working Group 

Joint Technical Coordinating Group 

Joint Technical Coordinating Group-Computer Aided Acquisition and Logistics 

Joint Technical Coordinating Group-Flexible Computer Integrated Manufacturing 

Joint Technical Coordinating Group-Integrated Product Data Environment 

Joint Task Force 


Knowledge Based Logistics Planning Shell 
Republic of Korea Visit to the US 



Thousand Square Feet 













































Laboratory Command 

Logistics Anchor Desk 

Lightweight Arctic Forward Area Refueling Equipment 

Logistics Advisory Group 

Logistics Automation Integration Support 

Louisiana Maneuvers 

Local Area Network 

Liaison Office 

Logistics Assistance Office 

Logistics Assistance Office, Europe 

Logistics Assistance Program 

Logistics Assistance Program Activity 

Logistics Assistance Representative 

Lighter, Amphibious, Resupply, Cargo 

Lighter Aboard Ships 

Lead-Based Paint 

Life Cycle Cost Estimate 

Life Cycle Software Engineering Center 

Leak Detection 

Leadership Education and Development 

Letterkenny Army Depot 

Laboratory Joint Cross Service Group 

Low Level Radioactive Waste 

Logistics Management Institute 

Large Medium Speed Ships 

Logistics Operation Center 

Leghorn Army Depot Activity 

Logistics and Acquisition Management Program 

Logistics Applications of Automated Marking and Reading Symbols 

Logistics Applications of Automated Marking and Reading Technology 

Logistics Support Activity 

Logistics Technology 

Lightning Protection 

Long Range Research, Development and Acquisition Plan 

Low Specific Activity 

LRRDAP Standard Automated System 

Logistics Support Element 

Logistics Support Group 

Logistics Studies Steering Committee 

Limited Scope Surety Inspection 

Lost Time Claims 

Land Threat Environment Projection 

Land Warrior 


Manufacturing and Production 

Mobilization AVCRAD Control Element 

Major Command 

Major Automated Information System Review Council 


MANPRINT Manpower and Personnel Integration 

MANTECH Manufacturing Technology 

MAPL Military Acquisition Position List 

MASINT Measurements and Signatures Intelligence 

MATDEV Materiel Developer 

MBPL Modular Base Petroleum Lab 

MBTU Million British Thermal Units 

MC Mission Capable 

MCA Major Construction, Army 

MCF Modular Causeway Ferry 

MCIS Materiel Change Information System 

MCM Materiel Change Management 

MCP Management Control Plan 

MDA Milestone Decision Authority 

MDAP Major Defense Acquisition Programs 

MDARS Mobile Detection Assessment Response System 

MDEP Management Decision Package 

MEA Management Engineering Activity 

MEARS Multi-User Engineering Change Proposal Automated Review System 

MEDCEN Medical Center 

MEDCOM U.S. Army Medical Command 

MEDDAC Medical Department Activity Commanders 

MGB Medium Girder Bridges 

MHE Materiel Handling Equipment 

MI Minority Institutions 

MICOM U.S. Army Missile Command 

MIG Moore, Iacofano, and Goltsman 

MIJI Meaconing, Intrusion, Jamming, and Interference 

MILCON Military Installations and Facilities 

MJLDEP Military Deputy 

MILSPEC Military Specifications 

MTLSTAMP Military Standard Transportation and Movement Procedures 

MIPA Multi-Functional Information Processing Activities 

MIPR Military Interdepartmental Purchase Requests 

MIS Management Information System 

MiTLA Microcircuit Technology in Logistics Applications 

MJWG MANPRINT Joint Working Group 

MLRS Multiple Launch Rocket System 

MMC Materiel Management Center 

MMDF Multichannel Memorandum Distribution Facility 

MMOA Master Memorandum of Agreement 

MMP Mobilization (Contingency) Master Planning 

MMS Mast Mounted Site 

MMW Millimeter Wave 

MOA Memorandum of Agreement 

MOADS Maneuver Oriented Ammunition Distribution System 

MOBTDA Mobilization Table of Distribution and Allowances 

MOCAS Mechanization of Contract Administration Services 

MOD Ministry of Defense 

MOP Memorandum of Policy 

MOS Military Occupational Specialty 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 





















































Manufacturing, Production, and Quality Assurance 

Materiel Readiness 

Materiel Release 

Major Regional Conflicts 

Materiel Requirements Documents 

Meal, Ready to Eat 

Materiel Release Orders 

Mobility Requirements Study 


Manufacturing Science and Technology 

Maintenance Support Activities 

Mine Safety Appliance 

Major Subordinate Command 

Materiel Support Center-Korea 

Military Traffic Management Command 

MACOM Telephone Modernization Program 

Modification Table of Organization and Equipment 

Modification Work Order 

Morale, Welfare, and Recreation 

Mainz Army Depot 


National Automotive Center 

NATO Communications and Systems Agency 

National Armaments Director 

Non-Appropriated Fund 

Non- Appropriated Fund Instrumentalities 

NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency 

National Aerospace Standard 

National Airspace System 

North American Technology and Industrial Base Organization. 

North Atlantic Treaty Organization 

Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical 

Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, Reconnaissance System 

National Command Authority 

National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence 

Non-Developmental Item 

National Environmental Policy Act 

New Equipment Training 

National Guard 

National Guard Bureau 

National Guard Battalion 

Non-Governmental Organizations 

National Inventory Control Point 

National Item Identification Number 

National Maintenance Point 

National Priorities List 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Natick Research and Development Center 

National Resources Program Review 

Non-Rolling Stock 

Naval Science Advisor Program 

Non Stock Fund Orders and Payables 





















































NATO Standard Interface Specification 
National Stock Number 


Operations and Support 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition) 

Open Burning/Open Detonation 

Operating Cost Authority 

Office of the Chief, Army Reserve 

Office, Chief Legislative Liaison 

Office of Congressional Liaison 

Outside the Continental United States 

Ozone Depleting Chemical 

Office of the Deputy Commanding General 

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Acquisition 

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics 

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations 

Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Resource Management 

Office of Director of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications, and Computers 

Office of Director of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications, and Computers 

Officer Distribution Plan 

Operation Desert Storm 

Ozone Depleting Substances 

Overseas Deployment Training 

Office of Equal Opportunity 

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance 

Occupational Health 

Occupational Health Partnership Program 

Office for International Cooperative Programs 

Organizational Inspection Program 

Operational Logistics Readiness 

Operations and Maintenance, Army 

Office of Management and Budget 

Operations Other Than War 

Operational Project 

Other Procurement, Army 

Other Procurement, Army, Activity 2 

Operation Plan 

Office of Personnel Management 

Office of the Program Manager-Saudi Arabian National Guard 

Operation Order 

Operational Tempo 

Operational Requirements Document 

Outside Cable Rehabilitation 

Operations and Support Cost Reduction 

Office of the Secretary of Defense 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

Occupational Safety and Health Program 

On Site Inspection Agency 

Operating and Support Management Information System 

Optimum Stockage Requirements Analysis Program 

Order Ship Time 

Oshkosh Truck Corporation 



Office of the Surgeon General 

P3I Pre-Planned Product Improvement 

PA Procurement Army 

PA&E Program Analysis and Evaluation 

PAA Procurement of Ammunition, Army 

PAC Policy Action Committee 

PADDS Procurement Automated Data Document System 

PAE Pacific Architect and Engineering 

PAI Personnel Asset Inventory 

PARC Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracts 

PAT Process Action Team 

PBA Program/Budget/Allocations 

PBAS Program Budget Accountability System 

PBD Program Budget Decisions 

PBG Program Budget Guidance 

PBS Production Base Support 

PC-ASORTS Personal Computer-Army Status of Resources and Training System 

PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl 

PCIP Productivity Capital Investment Program 

PCIS Portable Common Interface Set 

PCS Permanent Change of Station 

PCTE Portable Common Tool Environment 

PDA Principal Deputy for Acquisition 

PDES Product Data Exchange Specification 

PDF Portable Data File 

PDL Principal Deputy for Logistics 

PDM Program Decision Memorandum 

PDT Principal Deputy for Technology 

PECIP Productivity Enhancing Capital Investment Program 

PEG Program Evaluation Group 

PEL Permissible Exposure Level 

PEO Program Executive Officer 

PEP Production Equipment Package 

PERSCOM Personnel Command 

PG Proving Ground 

PLS Palletized Load System 

PM Procurement Management 

PM Program Manager 

PM-CCE/MHE PM for Commercial Construction Equipment and Materiel Handling Equipment 

PM-PWL Program Manager for Petroleum and Water Logistics 

PMC Program Manager Course 

PMFE Program Manager, Future Europe 

PMO Program Management Office 

PMR Procurement Management Review 

PMRS Performance Management and Recognition System 

PMSDA Program Management System Development Activity 

POAM Plan of Action and Milestones 

POI Program of Instruction 

POL Petroleum, Oils, and Lubricants 

POM Preparation for Overseas Movement 

POM Program Objective Memorandum 


POMCUS Prepositioning of Materiel Configured to Unit Sets 

POP Proof of Principle 

POSH Prevention of Sexual Harassment 

PPBES Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System 

PPC4I Power Projection Command Control Communications, and Computers Infrastructure 

PPQT Preproduction Qualification Test 

PPTF Public-Private Task Force 

PQAS Petroleum Quality Analysis System 

PRAG Performance Risk Analysis Group 

PREPO Pre-positioned 

PRF Post Restaurant Fund 

PSCC Packaging, Storage, and Containerization Center 

PSE Physical Security Equipment 

PSF Prepositioned Sustainment Maintenance Facility 

PSRB Performance Standards and Review Board 

PSS Prepositioned Strategic Stocks 

PSSC Packaging, Storage, and Containerization Center 

PSYOPS Psychological Operations 

PUC Procurement Unit Cost 

PVAMU Prairie View A&M University 

QDH/SS Quick Doff Hood/Second Skin 

QDR Quality Deficiency Report 

QER Quarterly Evaluation Report 

QMB Quality Management Board 

QMR Quarterly Management Report 

QMS Quartermaster School 

QOL Quality of Life 

QRC Quick Reaction Coordinators 

QRIP Quick Return on Investment Program 

QSTAG Quadripartite Standardization Agreement 

QWG Quadripartite Working Group 


R-3 Resource Recovery and Reuse 

R&D Research and Development 

RA Regular Army 

RAAWS Ranger Anti-Armor Anti-Personnel Weapon System 

RACs Risk Assessment Codes 

RADPAC Radiation Policy Action Committee 

RAIS Relocation Automated Information System 

RAM Reliability, Availability and Maintainability 

RAM Resource Allocation Model 

RAM Risk Assessment Methodology 

RASA Regional Aviation Support Activity 

RASA Redstone Arsenal Support Activity 

RC Reserve Component 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

RD&E Research, Development, and Engineering 

RDA Research, Development and Acquisition 

RDD Required Delivery Date 

RDEC Research, Development and Engineering Center 


RDF Rapid Deployment Forces 

RDTE Research, Development, Test and Evaluation 

REC Record of Environmental Consideration 

REDCON Readiness Condition 

RETROEUR Retrograde Europe 


RF Radio Frequency 

RFI Roadshow for Industry 

RFTD Radio Frequency Identification 

RFP Request for Proposal 

RIA Rock Island Arsenal 

RIDB Readiness Integrated Data Base 

RIF Reduction in Force 

RM Resource Management 

RMA Rocky Mountain Arsenal 

RMIS Restoration Management Information System 

RO Reverse Osmosis 

RO/RO Roll-On/Roll-Off 

ROA Report of Availability 

ROC RESHAPE Operations Center 

ROD Record of Decision 

ROWPU Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Units 

RPI Real Property Inventory 

RPMA Real Property Maintenance Activity 

RRAD Red River Army Depot 

RRP Radon Reduction Program 

RS Roadshow 

RSA Regional Supply Activity 

RSAH Reserve Storage Activity, Hythe 

RSC Regional Support Center 

RSCAAL Remote Sensing Chemical Agent Alarm 

RSI Rationalization, Standardization, and Interoperability 

RSI Roadshow for Industry 

RSOI Reception, Staging, Onward Movement, and Integration 

RVARS Requisition Validation Automated Redistribution System 

S/A Service/Agency 

S&I Standardization and Interoperability 

S&T Science and Technology 

SA Support Activity 

SAACONS Standard Army Automated Contracting System 

SAAD Sacramento Army Depot 

SAC Senate Appropriations Committee 

SADARM Search and Destroy Armament 

SADBU Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 

SAE Society of Automotive Engineers 

SAFER Storage Analysis Failure Evaluation and Reclamation 

SAIC Science Applications International Corporation 

SANG Saudi Arabian National Guard 

SAP Special Access Program 

SAP Strategic Action Plan 

SAPOC Special Access Program Oversight Committee 


SAPSAT Special Access Program Staff Assistance Team 

SARDA Secretary of the Army for RDA 

SARS Standard Army Refueling System 

SASC Senate Armed Services Committee 

SATS Standard Army Training System 

SAV Special Assistance Visit 

SAW Squad Automatic Weapon 

SBIR Small Business Innovation Research 

SBIS Sustaining Bases Information Services 

SCE Software Capability Evaluation 

SCPE Simplified Collective Protection Equipment 

SCR Senior Command Representative 

SCR System Change Request 

SDO Supply Depot Operations 

SDS Standard Depot System 

SDT Second Destination Transportation 

SDT Secondary and Major Items Destination Transportation 

SDT Second Destination Transportation 

SEA Supply Excellence Award 

SEC Securities and Exchange Commission 

SECDEF Secretary of Defense 

SEEP Scientist and Engineer Exchange Program 

SEFT Section des Etudes et Fabrication des Tetecommunications (France) 

SEI Software Engineering Institute 

SEL School of Engineering and Logistics 

SEP Soldier Enhancement Program 

SEP Special Envrionmental Project 

SERB Selective Early Retirement Board 

SERDP Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program 

SES Senior Executive Service 

SETAF Southern European Task Force 

SFA Surety Field Activity 

SFDLR Stock Funding of Depot Level Reparables 

SFEDP Special Focus Executive Development Program 

SGS Secretary of the General Staff 

SHF Super High Frequency 

SI Secondary Items 

SIC Standardization Improvement Council 

SICC Service Item Control Center 

SIDPERS Standard Installation Division Personnel System 

SIG CMD Signal Command 

SII Statements of Intelligence Interest 

SIMA Systems Integration and Management Activity 

SIMNET Simulator Networking 

SINCGARS Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System 

SIP System Improvement Plan 

SIPE Soldier Integrated Protective Ensemble 

SISOCS Streamlining Information Service Operations Consolidation Study 

SITES Standard Installation Topic Exchange System 

SLA Service Level Agreement 

SLA Strategic Logistics Agency 

SM-ALC Sacramento Air Logistics Center 


SM-ALC Sacramento Air Logistics Center 

SMA Supply Management Army 

SMCA Single Manager for Conventional Ammunition 

SMHE Selected Materials Handling Equipment 

SMLB Strategic Mobility Logistics Base 

SMO Supply Management Operations 

SMR Surety Management Review 

SNR-A Senior National Representatives- Army 

SOF Special Operations Forces 

SOHC Safety and Occupational Health Council 

SOLE Society of Logistics Engineers 

SOP Standard Operating Procedure 

SOP Spill/Overfill Protection 

SORTS Status of Resources and Training System 

SOW Statement of Work 

SPCC Study Program Coordination Committee 

SPS Status Projection System 

SQT Software Qualification Test 

SRA Separate Reporting Activity 

SRA Specialized Repair Activity 

SSA Supply Support Activity 

SSA Source Selection Authority 

SSA Seckenheim Staging Activity 

SSAC Source Selection Advisory Council 

SSEB Source Selection Evaluation Board 

SSF Single Stock Fund 

SSN/PE Standard Stock Number/Program Element 

SSRA System Safety Risk Assessments 

SSSS-W Safety, Security, and Support Services-Washington 

SSTR Senior Staff Technical Representatives 

ST Senior Technical 

STA System Threat Assessment 

STAR System Threat Assessment Report 

STEP Secretarial Training and Enhancement Program 

STIR Special Technical Inspection and Repair 

STO Special Technology Office 

STO Science and Technology Objectives 

STOW-E Synthetic Theater of War - Europe 

STPA Service Technique des Programmes d'Armement 

STRICOM U.S. Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Command 

SUPCOM Support Command 

SWA Southwest Asia 

SYSPAC System Safety Policy Action Committee 

T&E Test and Evaluation 

TA/CP Technology Assessment/Control Plan 

TAA Total Army Analysis 

TAACOM Theater Army Area Command 

TAC Transportation Account Code 

TACMIS Tactical Management Information System 

TACOM U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command 

TACSAT Tactical Satellite 


TAF Transaction Action File 

TAIM Total Army Inventory Management 

TALO Theater Aviation Logistics Officer 

TAMMC Theater Army Materiel Management Center 

TAMMS Total Army Maintenance Management System 

TAPES Total Army Performance Evaluation System 

TARDEC Tank-Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Center 

TASP The AMC/Army Study Program 

TAV Total Asset Visibility 

TBE Technology Base Enhancement 

TC Type Classified 

TC-LRP Type Classified for Low Rate Production 

TD Technical Data 

TD/CMS Technical Data/Configuration Management System 

TDA Table of Distribution and Allowances 

TEAD Tooele Army Depot 

TEAL Tripwhite Equipment and Logistics 

TECHGEN Generate Technology 

TECOM U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command 

TECRAS Technical Reconnaissance and Surveillance 

TEISS The Enhanced Integrated Soldier System 

TEMA Test and Evaluation Management Agency 

TEMAC Test and Evaluation Managers Committee 

TEMOD Test, Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment Modernization 

TEMP Test and Evaluation Master Plan 

TEMPER Tent Extendable Modular Personnel 

TESON Trafficking Emplaced Sensor Operational Network 

TI3 Technology Implementation and Infrastructure Improvement 

TILO Technical and Industrial Liaison Office 

TIR Test Incident Report 

TIWG Test Integration Working Group 

TLE Treaty Limited Equipment 

TM Technical Manual 

TMDE Test, Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment 

TMIWG Tactical Missile Implementation Working Group 

TNC-JSWG Tactical Missile Consolidation-Joint Service Working Group 

TOAD Tobyhanna Army Depot 

TOE Table of Organization and Equipment 

TP Target Practice 

TP-T Training Practice-Tracer 

TPCSDS-T Training Practice, Cone Stabilized, Discarding Sabot-Tracer 

TPF Total Package Fielding 

TPT Tactical Petroleum Terminals 

TQG Tactical Quiet Generator 

TQM Total Quality Management 

TR/CR Theater/CONUS Reserves 

TRADE Training Devices 

TRADOC Training and Doctrine Command 

TRANSCOM U.S. Army Transportation Command 

TSARC Test Schedule and Review Committee 

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act 

TSD Threat System Description 













































The Surgeon General 
Time- Weighted Average 


Usage Based Requirements Determination 

Unit Cost Goal 

Ulchi Focus Lens Exercise 

Ultra High Frequency 

Unique Item Tracking 

Unliquidated Obligation 

Unit Ministry Team 

United Nations 

U.N. Operation in Somalia 

U.S. Army Audit Agency 

U.S. Army Concepts Analysis Agency 

U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command Communication Security Logistics Agency 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

U.S. Army Chemical Materiel Destruction Agency 

U.S. Army Defense Ammunition Center and School 

U.S. Army Environmental Environmental Hygiene Agency 

U.S. Army Engineer School 

U.S. Agency for International Development 

U.S. Army Information Systems Command 

U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command 

U.S. Army Quartermaster Center & School 

U.S. Army Reserve 

U.S. Army Research, Development, and Standardization Group 

U.S. Army, Europe 

United States Army, Europe 

U.S. Army Security Assistance Command 

U.S. Army Special Operations Command 

U.S. Army Technical Center for Explosives Safety 

U.S. Code 

Under Secretary of Defense 

Unisted States Military Academy 

United States Military Academy 

U.S. Message Text Format 

Unit Status Reporting 

U.S. Special Operations Command 


Veterans' Administration 
Vice Chief of Staff, Army 
Value Engineering 

Value Engineering Program Managers 
Voluntary Early Retirement Authority 
Voluntary Leave Transfer Program 
Volatile Organic Compound 
Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay 
Video Teleconference 


Working Group 


WIDGET Weekly Intelligence Digest 

WRAIR Walter Reed Army Institute for Research 

WRAP War Reserve Automated Process 

WRMAG Water Resources Management Action Group 

WRS-T War Reserve Stocks-Thailand 

WWI World War I 

YPG Yuma Proving Ground 

YS Youth Services 


Distribution List 

Separate Reporting Activities 


U.S. Army Research Office 

P.O.Box 12211 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2211 


U.S. Army Materiel Command-Europe 

Unit 29331, Box 55 

APO AE 09266 


U.S. Army Materiel Command-Far East 

APO AP 96301-0066 

(Yongsan, Korea) 


U.S. Army Industrial Engineering Activity 

Rock Island, IL 61299-7260 


U.S. Army Materiel Command Installations and Services Activity 

Rock Island, IL 61299-7190 


U.S. Army Materiel Command Intelligence and Technology Security Activity 

5001 Eisenhower Avenue 

Alexandria, VA 22333-0001 

Executive Director 

U.S. Army Materiel Command Logistics Support Activity 

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-7466 


AMC Management Engineering Activity 

Building 7770, Line Road 

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-7260 


U.S. Army Management Engineering College 

Rock Island, IL 61299-7040 



U.S. Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5071 


U.S. Army Research, Development, and Standardization Group (Austrailia) 

Unit 1 1007 

APO AP 96549-5000 


U.S. Army Research, Development, and Standardization Group (Canada) 

National Defense Headquarters 

101 Colonel By Drive 

Ottawa, Canada Kl A OK2 


U.S. Army Research, Development, and Standardization Group (Germany) 

American Embassy, Bonn 

Unit 21701, Box 165 

APO AE 09080 


U.S. Army Research, Development, and Standardization Group (UK) 

PSC802,Box 15 

APO AE 09499-1500 


U.S. Army Science and Technology Center - Europe 

Unit 29623 

APO AE 09096 


U.S. Army Science and Technology Center - Far East 

Unit 45015 

APO AP 96343-0074 


U.S. Army Materiel Command Surety Field Activity 

Building E-5027 

5179 Hoadley Road 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401 

Deputy Executive Director 

U.S. Army Test, Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment Activity 

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5400 


Major Subordinate Commands 


U.S. Army Research Laboratory 
Attn: AMSLC-PA (Dr. William Moye) 
Adelphi, MD 20783-1145 


U.S. Army Aviation and Troop Command 
Attn: AMSAT-GSH (Dr. Howard K. Butler) 
4300 Goodfellow Boulevard 
St. Louis, MO 63120-1798 


U.S. Army Chemical and Biological Defense Command 
Attn: SMCCR-HO (Mr. Jeffrey Smart) 
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5423 


U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command 
Attn: AMSEL-HL (Dr. Richard Bingham) 
Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703-5000 


U.S. Army Industrial Operations Command 
Attn: AMSMC-HO(R) (Dr. Herbert Lepore) 
Rock Island, IL 61299-6000 


U.S. Army Missile Command 

Attn: AMSMI-HI (Mr. Michael Baker) 

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5000 


U.S. Army Soldier Systems Command (Prov.) 
Attn: AMSSC-SIM (Ms. Lightbody) 
Natick, Massachussetts 01760-5000 


U.S. Army Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation Command 
Attn: AMSTI-CSP (Mrs. Meyers) 
1 2350 Research Parkway 
Orlando, FL 32826-3276 



U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command 
Attn: AMSTA-CH (Dr. Dale Prentiss) 
Warren, MI 48397-5000 


U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command 
Attn: AMSTE-PE-H (Dr. Britt McCarley) 
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5055 


U.S. Army Security Assistance Command 
Attn: AMSAC-SA (Mr. Ken Spalding) 
5001 Eisenhower Avenue 
Alexandria, VA 22333-0001 


U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Center 
ATTN: SMCAR-INH (Dr. Patrick Owen) 
Dover, NJ 07801-5001 

Historical Offices 

U.S. Army Center of Military History 

1099 14th Street, NW 

Franklin Court 

Washington, DC 20005-3402 


U.S. Army War College 

Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013-5050 

U.S. Army Military History Institute 
Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013-5008 

U.S. Army Europe 
APOAE 09014 

Eighth Army 
PSC 303, Box 45 
APO AP 96205-0009 

U.S. Army Forces Command 
ATTN: AFSG-MH (Military History) 
Ft. McPherson, GA 30330-6000 


U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command 


Ft. Monroe, VA 23651-5000 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
Office of History 
7701 Telegraph Road 
Alexandria, VA 22315-3865 

U.S. Army Information Systems Command 

ATTN: ASCS-H(#31) 

Ft. Huachuca, AZ 85613-5000 

U.S. Army Special Operations Command 
Director, History and Museums 
Attn: AOHS 
Fort Bragg, NC 28307-5000 

U.S. Army Pacific 


Fort Shafter, HI 96858-5100 

Military Traffic Management Command 

ATTN: MTCS-H (Rm 325) 

561 1 Columbia Pike 

Falls Church, VA 22041-5050 

U.S. Army Medical Command 

ATTN: MCCS-GHI (MEDCOM Historical Office) 

2250 Stanley Road 

Ft. Sam Houston, TX 78234-6170 

U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command 


8825 Beulah Street 

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5370 

U.S. Army Military District of Washington 
Old Guard Museum 
FortMyer,VA 22211 

U.S. Army South 
Unit 7101 
APO AA 34004-5000 


U.S. Army Military Academy 
Department of History 
Attn: MADN-K 
West Point, NY 10996-1793 

U.S. Army Command and General Staff College 


Ft. Leavenworth, KS 66027-6900 

U.S. Army Combined Arms Center 


Ft. Leavenworth, KS 66027-5000 

U.S. Army Logistics Center 
Ft.Lee,VA 23801-6000 

U.S. Army Center for Army Lessons Learned 
HQ Combined Training Academy 
Ft. Leavenworth, KS 66027-7000 


Rock Island Arsenal Museum 


Rock Island Arsenal, IL 61299-5000 

U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Historical Holding 

Kaplan Hall, Bldg 275 

Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703-5000 

Watervliet Arsenal Museum 
Watervliet Arsenal 
Watervliet, NY 12189-4050 

White Sands Missile Range Historical Holding 


White Sands Missile Range, NM, 88002-5047 


Headquarters AMC 

Commanding General 

Deputy Commanding General 

Chief of Staff 

Command Sergeant Major 

Principal Deputy for Acquisition 

Principal Deputy for Technology 

Principal Deputy for Logistics 

Commanding General's Staff Group 

DCS for Ammunition 

DCS for Chemical and Biological Matters 

DCS for Engineering, Housing, Environment & Installation Logistics 

DCS for Intelligence 

DCS for Logistics 

DCS for Personnel 

DCS for Research, Development and Acquisition 

DCS for Resource Management 

Executive Director for TMDE 

Executive Director for Conventional Ammunition 

Office, CALS Requirements Integration 

Office of the Command Chaplain 

Office of the Command Counsel 

Office, Congressional Liaison 

Office, Corporate Information 

Office of Equal Opportunity 

Office, Foreign Liaison 

Office, Historical 

Office of the Inspector General 

Office, Internal Review and Audit Compliance 

Office for International Cooperative Programs 

Office, Protocol 

Office of Public Affairs 

Office, Safety 

Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 

Office, Special Analysis 

Office of the Special Assistant for Quality 

Office of the Surgeon 

Office, U.S. Army Reserves 


Saudi Arabian National Guard Modernization Program 

Special Assistant for Joint Activities 

Technical Library 


-SN3H ' V • S SH ' ' 



LGINIA 22333-0001, 


mil FAX: (703) 274-0824 AMCCS 

HG R. E. MCCOY 10E20 49637 AMCCS 

COL M. E. GPIFFABD. . . 10S60 49639 AMCACS 

CPT D. GORE 10E20 49637 AMCCS 

MS E. E. PARDUE 10S55 49665 AMCCS-A 

MSP. S. BEAVER 10E20 49637 AMCCS 


Secretary of Gen Staff LTC R. L. PICKETT .... 10S50 70116 AMCGS 

Assistant SGS CPT Y. C. DENNIS . . . . 10S54 70115 AMCGS 

Assistant SGS CPT T. WORTH 10S54 70117 AMCGS 

Assistant SGS CPT P. LANTZER 10S54 70118 AMCGS 

Enlisted Adv 




Ofc for 


Multl - I 


c Aatt fc 


Bl-Lat F 


Int'l Hi 




amcdsealexandria-emhi .army .mil 

FAX: (703) 274-433B 


Deputy Chief of Staff MG W. A. FITZGERALD 5E22 48380 AMCDS 


amsacealexandrla-amhl. army. mil FAX: (703) 274-4338 AMSAC 

Commanding General MG W. 


Aide-de-Camp CPT J 

Deputy MR P . 

Chief of Staff COL C 


Admin G Security Div MR D. 

Resource Manager MR J . 

Policy, Plans S Ops MR R. 

Infl Ind Coop MR D. 

Asia. Pacific. Americas COL W 

Europe COL H 

Mideast Africa COL C 

Saudi Modernization COL P 

FMS Auto PM Div MR C . 

ADP Support OlV MS G . 

Dap for Opns NCAD COL L 



CATON 5S56 48394 AMSAC 



CHASE 5S56 48384 AMSAC-S 


USER 5N51 48385 AMSAC-SA 

SMITH 5H12 43308 AMSAC -R 

L. LUM 5S54 48439 AMSAC-MP 

LEACH 5S10 48371 AMSAC-MI 


GIBB 5N14 48399 AMSAC-ME 

CHASE 5S22 48451 AMSAC-MM 



RIZZO 5N39 43473 AMSAC-IM-H 

CURL 8-977-6800 AMSAC-0 



FAX: (703) 274-6152 


C. Mash Field Office LTC E. PARSONS 5S27 49126 AMCPM-NGW 

Lav Integration MR D. WALKER 5S27 49126 AMCPM-NGW 

Administrative Office MRS K. DARIUS 5S27 49126 AMCPM-NGW 


Ambulance 9-911 

After duty hrs. call Guard G2C60 49223 

AMC Building Management 4W08 43634 

AMC HQ Property Book 4S09 43624 

AMC Security Manager 1E06 49566 

Conference Room Scheduling 1C56 48485 

Credit Union Lobby 9-823-5211 

Dining Facility (Exec) 10N53 49569 

DOD Bldg Manager 1S34 48099 

Driver Service 10S49 48492 

Fitness Center 751-7330 

Forms Management Office S3C25 48153 

Graphics 1C22 48490/1 

Guard Lobby 41894 

HQ Acquisition Management 4S09 40659 

Info Mgmt Help Desk 4S51 49333 

Learning Resource Center (LRC) 5C22 48213 

Locator Service 7C22 49491 

Nurse 1S51 48296 

Operations Ctr (SDO) (Duty Hr) G2C60 49223/8406 

Parking/Towing (PMI) Lobby 9-685-4438 

Personnel Svc Ctr (Mil Pers) 7S50 48149 

Photographic 1C44 48486 

Publications/Blank Forms G3C19 49663/4 

Reservetions (Carlson Travel Network) 212-7810 

SAC. CID-AMC Fraud Coord 1E10 49454 

Staff Duty Officer G2C60 49223 

Stockroom iJDSSW/3LA Ofc Sup) 62C31 45885 

Telecommunications Center 63C20 49009 

Tickets. Pick-up (Carlson Travel) 1E19 212-7810 

Travel Office 7N08 45511 

Video Teleconferencing S1C01 44585 


FAX: (703) 274-8760 



Deputy Dlr of Info Mgmt MR 

Resource Services MS 

Automation Services Div MR 

Applications Development Br... MR 

Network Operations Branch MR 

HQ Support Services Div MR 

Security Manager 

Postal Br MR 

Printing G Publications Br MR 

Telecommunications Br MR 

Video Teleconferencing Br MR 

Visual Information Branch MR 

Technical Librery MS 

IMA Services Division MS 

Information Center MR 

IMA Contracts MS 

IMA Plennlng MS 

H. JARRELL 4S52 48282 AMCIO-I 


L. DEVERS 4S58 48868 AMCIO-I-B 

D . POLINSKY 4S25 48546 AMCIO-I-A 

G . METZ (Act) 4S27 48546 AMCIO-I-AA 

B . VAN CAMP 4S06 48912 AMCIO-I-AO 






W. HAYES 81C01 44585 AMCIO-I-ST 


L. KENNEDY 7S35 48152 AMCIO-I-L 

S. MAKS 4E22 40764 AMCIO-I-R 

M . HOLOEN 4E22 49338 AMCIO-I-RI 


W. KYNARD 4E22 48862 AMCIO-I-RP 


Deputy Commanding General LTG L. PIGATY.... 

Principal Deputy for Acq MR D. GRIFFIN.... 

Principal Deputy for Tech MR M. F. FISETTE. 

Principal Deputy for Log MR R. KELTZ 

Executive Officer COL G. FRENN 

Secretary MRS S. R. SPARKS. 

10N06 49705 AMCDCG 
. 10N06 49560 AMCDCG-A 

10N12 49640 AMCDCG-T 
, 10N12 49700 AMCDCG-L 
. 10N06 49709 AMCDCG-XO 
, 10N06 49705 AMCDCG 


FAX: (703) 274-9303 


Executive Director LTG L. PIGATY 10N06 49705 AMCTM 

Dir. US Army TMDE Activity MR R. DUBOIS. . .REDSTONE ARS DSN 746-1134 AMXTM 




Exec Dir for Conv Ammo LTG L. PIGATY 10N06 49705 AMXED 

Dep Exec Dir/Conv Ammo CAPT R. WERLING, USN 7S04 49540 AMXED-D 

Plans and Programs COL T. MAGUIRE. USAF 7S04 45620 AMXED-PP 

Production and Logistics MAJ V. BROWNING 7S04 49550 AMXED-PL 


Office of Small S Dlaad Bus VACANT 10S14 48185 AMCSB 


















USASAC . . . 











amc cg@a lexandr ia-emh 4 . army .mil 

FAX: (703) 274-4723 


Commanding General GEN L. E. SALOMON.. 

Command Sergeant Major CSM M. B. PIERCE... 

Executive Officer COL S. L. KINDRED.. 

Assistant XO LTC C. H. CONNER. . . 

Aide-De-Camp MAJ R. G. HATCH 

Secretary MS A. B. DUCKWORTH. 

. 10E14 49626 AMCCG 
. 10E20 4B257 AMCCG-CSM 
. 10E14 49626 AMCCG 
. 10E14 49626 AMCCG 
. 10E14 49626 AMCCG 
. 10E14 49626 AMCCG 

CG'S STAFF GROUP FAX: (703) 274-053B 


Director COL L . A . TAYLOR 

Special Asst to CG MR C. D. HUNTER 

Special Asst to CG MR J. L. STAHL 

Special Asst to CG COL J. J. DEYERMOND. 

Special Asst to CG LTC L. J. KOVAR 

Special Asst to CG LTC D. SAFFOLD 

, 10N24 49308 AMCCG-SG 
. 10N24 49574 AMCCG-SG 
. 10N26 71014 AMCCG-SG 
. 10N26 70105 AMCCG-SG 
. 10N1B 70100 AMCCG-SG 
. 10N1B 48146 AMCCG-SG 

OMBUDSMAN FAX: (703) 274-0824 


Special Asst to CG MR L. J. ASHLEY. 

. 10S48 48252 AMCOB 



Inspector General COL W. HUFF 


. 1S38 48070 AMCIG 


Inspector General COL W. HUFF 1S38 48070 AMXIG 

Investigations S Asst Div COL J. HICKMAN 1S24 48064 AMXIG-IA 

Inspections S Support Div MS B. LABHART 3N39 4B072 AMXIG-IS 

Policy. Admin. S Coord Br MS T. KASTROBA 3N09 48083 AMXIG-IS-P 

JOINT ACTIVITIES FAX: (703) 274-5730 


Special Assistant to CG MR G. P. MCINTOSH 8N08 49694 AMCJO 


amxeu-eealexandrla-emh4. army .mil FAX: 011-49621-478791 


Commander COL S. R. MANESS. .ExHeldelberg DSN 370-8431 AMXEU-C 

Deputy for Ops MR R. A. ROANE Heidelberg DSN 370-6068 AMXEU-CD 

Dep for Readiness MR C. SLYKER Heidelberg DSN 370-8888 AMXLA-E 

HQ. AMC-FAR EAST FAX: 011-82-2-798-1017 


Commander COL D. R. HITE Yongsan DSN 723-4074 AMXFE 

Dep Cdr/Ch. LAO-FE MR L. DAVIS Yongsan DSN 723-3752 AMXLS-K 

FAX CM 011-82-2-7913-9614 DSN 723-9614 



Commander . 
Oaputy . . . . 

.COL G. G. PROSCH DSN 318-435-7310 

.MR J. JOBE DSN 318-435-7310 

Staff Duty Officer 
DSN: 284-9223 
COMMERCIAL: 703-274-9223 

Operations Center: 
DSN: 284-8406 
COMMERCIAL: 703-274-8406 

DSN: 667-7XXX 

Prepared by: 

DOIM (USAISC-Alexandria) 

U.S. Army Materiel Command 
DSN: 284-5261 

COMMERCIAL: 703-274-5261 

CHIEF OF STAFF FAX: (703) 274-0824 


Chief of Staff MG R. E. MCCOY 10E20 49637 AMCCS 

Assistant Chief of Staff... COL M. E. GRIFF ARD. .. 10S60 49639 AMCACS 

Executive Officer CPT D. GORE 10E20 49637 AMCCS 

Administrative Office MS E. E. PARDUE 10S55 49665 AMCCS-A 

Secretary MS P. S. BEAVER 10E20 49637 AMCCS 


Secretary of Gen Staff LTC R. L. PICKETT 10S50 70116 AMCGS 

Assistant SGS CPT Y. C. DENNIS 10S54 70115 AMCGS 

Assistant SGS CPT T. WORTH 10S54 70117 AMCGS 

Assistant SGS CPT P. LANTZER 10S54 70118 AMCGS 



A. TULL (Act) . 

. P. AEILLO, . . . 



















. . .MAJ T 

. . .MRS D 

... MR R . 



V. O'BRIEN. . . , 



CORNETT (Act) . 

... MR T . 

Business Interface S Inte. 

. . .MR E. 



DCS for Ammunition BG W. R. HOLMES 8W22 49B36 AMCAM 

ADCS for Ammunition MR J. C. HILL 8W22 48001 AMCAM 

Executive Officer MS L. LONGO 8W22 48021 AMCAM 

Administrative Officer MS L. F. UHRIG 8N11 48997 AMCAM 

Chief. Integretion Ofc MR J. LAWSON (Act) 3D462 614-4287 AMCAM-IO 

Chief. Plans and Budget Div... MR R. GRUBENMANN BW06 49792 AMCAM-PB 

Chief. Program Mgmt Div COL J. B. CROSS 8W06 49842 AMCAM-PM 

Chief. Production Div MR G. CSERI BN15 45130 AMCAM-PD 

Chief. Logistics Div MR L. V. GULLEDGE 8W18 45132 AMCAM-LG 

Chief. Arms Inlt Task Group... COL M. COLEMAN 8N15 49838 AMCAM-AR 





; 0R 




FAX: (703) 




.BG G. 







584-4361 (Edgewood 


. APG. 




primary office 

Is located. 


• COL L 

. A 










amc iota lexandr ia-emh5 . army .mi 1 

FAX: (703) 617-7721 

AMC 10 

Corporate Information Officer. COL T. T. OSBORNE 4N24 48626 AMCIO 

Deputy Corporate Inf Ofc MR P. STERNBERG 4N24 49425 AMCIO 

Executive Officer. CIO VACANT 4N26 48366 AMCIO 

SGM. Corporate Inf Ofc SGM J. AMES 4N26 43748 AMCIO 

Administretlve Office MS B. QUACKENBUSH 4N34 48310 AMCIO-A 

Func/Tech/Info Mgmt Div MR J. GILL 4N16 49152 AMCIO-T 

Systems Oversight Div MR E. BRASSEUR 4N4B 49480 AMCIO-S 

Field Support Div MS M. CARROLL 4E08 49140 AMCIO-F 

Director of Info Mgmt MR H. JARRELL 4S52 48280 AMCIO-I 



amcenee lexandr la-emh4 . army .mil 

FAX: (703) 274-3895 


DCS for Eng. Hou. Env S II COL M. W. POTTER 4W22 49041 AMCEN 

ADCS. Eng. Hou. Env. G II MR D. ABDELNOUR 4W22 49042 AMCEN 

C. Environmental Quel Div LTC M. MONROE 4W20 49016 AMCEN-A 

C. Eng G Housing Div MR J. LOUQUE 4W06 49296 AMCEN-F 

C. Real Estate Mgmt Div MR S. FRIED 4S09 49899 AMCEN-R 

AMC Building Management 4W08 43634 AMCEN-R 

AMC HQ Property Book 4S09 43624 AMCEN-R 

HQ Acquisition Mgmt 4S09 40659 AMCEN-R 

Inst G Svcs Acty. R.I.. II COL W. MOOK DSN 793-5018 AMXEN 

•mcmiee lexandr ia-emh5 . srmy . a 

11 FAX: (703) 

27 A 



.MS P. PARSONS. . . 

. . 1E14 48136 








. .1614 48135 


62C63 49528 
. . 1S58 49095 

ADCS-Counter intelligence 



. . 1E22 47025 


. .1E14 45275 


62C63 48986 


12 FEBRUARY 1994 




DCS for Logistics MG F. 

ADCS for Logistics MR J. 

Executive Officer MS L. 

Administrative Office MS S. 

Director for Maint Mgt COL D, 

Assoc Dir/Malnt Prod MR G. 

Assoc Dir/Eng G lis MR M. 

Assoc Dlr/Integration MR G. 

Assoc Dir/Joint Maint MR J. 

Dlr of Materiel Mgt COL J, 

Assoc Dir/Requirements MR S. 

Assoc Dlr/Materiel Dist MR R. 

Assoc Dir/Asset Mgt MR J. 

Assoc Dir/Item Intro MR P. 

Director for Readiness COL S 

Assoc Dir/Strategic Res COL D 

Assoc Dir/Sustainment MR J. 

Assoc Dlr/Concepts COL J 

Assoc Dir/Plans, Opns. Ex MR A. 




A . COMRAS 9S08 


L. MOORE 9S12 

T. ISOM 9S36 



N. SIMS 9W14 


K. YOUNG 9W14 
















































DCS for Personnel MR G. 

ADCS for Perscnnsl COL A 

Execut 1 ve Off leer MAJ W 

Sergeant Major SGM G 

ADCSPER (Adjutant General) COL C 

ADCSPER (Comm G Family Actv) ..MR D. 

Dir, Pins. Prog. G Budget MS G. 

Dlr. Sec Law Enf/P Marshal COL R 

Equal Opportunity Advisor SFC E 

ADCSPER (Trng G Career Mgmt) ..MR H. 

ADCSPER (Trens Empl Serv) MR R. 

ADCSPER (SES/Class/Prg Eva MS J. 

HQ. Civ Personnel Office MR P. 

Human Resources Support MR E. 

Learning Resource Center MS J. 

L . JONES 7W06 



TAFT 7S38 

W. S. CHUN 7S44 



D. ALTON 1E10 




M. LYNCH 7N16 


C. WATT 7S09 
























4590 1 









amcrdBa lexandr la-emh4 . army .mil 

FAX: (703) 617-7810 



Executive Officer MAJ K 

Operations G Plans Div MRS B 

Administrative Officer MRS R 

AOCSRDE - Appns Mgmt MR W. 

RDTE Appns Mgmt Div MR V. 

Proc Appns Mgmt Div MR M. 

Programs G Plans Div MR A. 

Support Systems Div COL R 

Army. Counter-Drug RDA Ofc.. COL R 

ADCSRDE - Tech G Eng MR E. 

Engr G Indust Mgmt Div COL W 

RDTE Integration Div DR P. 

A. Sm Bus Inv Rsh Prg Ofc... MR J. 



USA Ind Eng Actvy MR J. 

Army Acq Pol Prev Spt Ofc... MR W. 

Spec Asst for Combat ID COL J 

Army Res Ofc - Washington. . .OR K. 

L. PRATHER 8E08 49490 AMCRD 


Y. HEARN BN55 48537 AMCRD-0 

M. WIEGEL BN47 48853 AMCRD-0 


D . BALDWIN 8N48 49871 AMCRD-AB 


LEFF (Act) 8N22 49099 AMCRD-AR 

D. LEWIS 3D433 614-8399 AMCRD-S 



G . THOMAS 8S22 44389 AMCRD-IE 

E. EHLE BE 14 49860 AMCRD-IT 





A. THEIS (Act) 8S40 40815 AMCRO-E 

R. EDWARDS. FT MEADE. ,301-621-7918 AMCRD-C 

A. GABRIEL 8N31 49240 ARO-W 



DCS for Resource Mgmt BG R. 

Executive Officer MAJ J 

Asst DC3 MR R. 

Administrative Office MRS M 

Prog Budg Funct Anal Div MR P. 

Cmd Anal Prog Budg Div MR R. 

Business Resources Div MR S. 

Cost Analysis Div MRS M 

Staff Finance G Acct Div MR T. 

Program Integration Div COL E 

Force Management Div MR D. 

Structure Mgmt Div MR R. 

Plane. Pol S Productivity MR D. 

Defense Fin G Acctg Serv MR T. 












































amcchealexandr ia-emh4. army .mil 

FAX: (703) 274-5079 


Command Chaplain COL G. MANGHAM 4E16 49432 AMCCH 

Dir. Pers G Mob LTC P. PEASE 4E16 77431 AMCCH 

Dlr. Resr. Log. Tng S Ops LTC B. MANNING 4E16 49435 AMCCH 



Command Counsel MR E. KORTE 7E06 48031 AMCCC 

Deputy Command Counsel MR R. MACFARLANE 7E06 48032 AMCCC 

SJA/Deputy Command Counsel COL T. KULLMAN 7E06 70238 AMCCC 

Executive Officer MR T. CAVEY 7E06 48048 AMCCC 

Asst Cmd Cnsl/Generel Law MR S. KLATSKY 7E18 48080 AMCCC-G 

Asst Cmd Cnsl/Protest Lit MR R. COUCH 7S58 48176 AMCCC-PL 

Asst Cmd Cnsl/Acq Law MS V. RICHARDS 7N56 77569 AMCCC-PA 



Congressional Liaison COL D. LONGLEY 10N34 4B265 AMCLL 

Congressional Liaison MR J. S. BENDORITIS 10N34 48266 AMCLL 

Congressional Liaison MS J. F. GULLEDGE 10N34 70200 AMCLL 

Congressional Liaison MS S. A. HENSON 10N34 70201 AMCLL 



Equal Opportunity MS M. SCARBROUGH 1S50 49003 AMCEE 

Equal Opportunity MR V. CARTER 1S50 49007 AMCEE 

Equal Opportunity MS S. CASON 1S50 48111 AMCEE 


Liaison Officer. Austrella LTC N. J. WHITE 10S44 49676 AMCLO 

Liaison Offlcsr. British LTC D. MADDISON 10S44 49675 AMCLO 

Liaison Officer. Canada LTC J. A. BOYD 10S44 49679 AMCLO 

Liaison Officer. Germany LTC H. WAGNER 10S38 49684 AMCLO 

amchoea lexandr la-amh4. army. mil FAX: (703) 274-5451 AMCHC 

Command Historian DR R. G. DARIUS 81W18 43776 AMCHO 

Historian DR H. A. LEVENTHAL 61W18 43775 AMCHO 

Historian/Archivist MR K. B. HOLIEN 81W18 48193 AMCHO 

Editorial Assistant MS D. DONOVAN G1W18 48191 AMCHO 


Chief. IRAC MR L. H. MAGUIRE 10324 70138 AMCIR 

Chief. Audit Compliance MR A. B. FORD 10S29 49023 AMCIR-A 

Chief. Internal Review MR D. W. GREEN 10S24 49021 AMCIR-I 

Internal Mgmt Control MR C. D. KNOWLES 10S29 77856 AMCIR-M 

PROTOCOL OFFICE FAX: (703) 274-0B24 


Protocol Officer MR S. L. SHOEMAKER 10S32 47853 AMCPR 

Protocol Specialist MS D. L. ST. JEAN 10S32 47853 AMCPR 



Ch. Public Affairs Office MR D. KIRCHOFFNER 10C45 70120 AMCPA 

Public Communications MR R. APONTE 10C45 48013 AMCPA 

Command Info G Products MRS N. DUNN 10C45 70121 AMCPA 

Support MR J. GORGAS 10C45 48019 AMCPA 

Enlisted Advisor MSG N. BOUCHARD 10C45 48012 AMCPA 

: FAX: (703) 274-4797 


Ch. Ofc for Int'l Coop Progs.. COL A. R. MARSHALL SNS6 49721 AMCICP 

Ch Multi - Let Progs Olv MR A. MAHR 5N56 70262 AMCICP-M 

Spec ASSt for Int'l R«0 MR J. LASH 5E08 49724 AMCICP 

Ch. Bl-Lat Progs Olv DR R. SMITH 5NS6 49398 AMCICP-B 

Ch. Int'l Matl Eval Div MR R. BLOOM APS OSN 296-1368 AMCICP-IME 


amesf Ba lexandr ia-emh5. army .mil 

FAX: (703) 274-9469 


Chief. Safety Office MR J. L. RANKIN 10N36 49476 AMCSF 

Administrative Assistant MS S. E. CLAWSON 10N36 49475 AMCSF 


FAX: (703) 274-0824 


Sen Adv Reserves COL J. E. KALOKERINOS 10W18 49689 AMCSA 

IMA Manager LTC G. ERICKSON 10W1B 48570 AMCSA 

RC-Tng LTC D. DALE 10W18 47114 AMCSA 


FAX: (703) 274-0824 


Sen Adv Nat Guard COL W. SMITH 10S36 49683 AMCNG 


amesoea lexandr ia-emh 4 . army . mi 1 

FAX: (703) 274-4991 


Chief. Special Analysis Ofc... MR M. SANDUSKY 4S22 48337 AMCSO 

Deputy. Special Analysis Ofc. MR W. FERRON 4S22 48279 AMCSO 

Chief. BRAC Office MR D. POWELL 4S44 48155 AMCSO 


FAX: (703) 274-4991 


ASSt Deputy for CALS MR M. SANDUSKY 4S22 48337 AMCCA 

Chief. Compt Aided Log Spt MR R. CALLAN 4C20 70249 AMCCA- 


FAX: (703) 274-8558 


Command Surgeon COL H. A. WIENER BS1S 49470 AMCSG 

Ch. Environmental Science COL J. R. HAMMOND 8S15 49472 AMCSG-S 

Ch. Medical Physics LTC J. C. JOHNSON 8S15 70242 AMCSG-R 

Health Hazard Assessment^ LTC W. ROBERTS 8S09 70241 AMCSG-H 

Ch. Occupational Medicine VACANT SS09 70239 AMCSG-0 

Industrial Hyglenist MR J. SVALINA 8S09 70240 AMCS6-I 

amctqealexandria-emh4. army. mil FAX: (703) 274-0824 


Special Asst for Quality MR S. J. ALSTER 10S15 44988 AMCTQ 

Management Prog Anal MS B. A. MONACO 10S15 44988 AMCTQ 


3 0112 031920967